Bowel preparation before laparoscopic gynaecological surgery in benign conditions using a 1-week low fibre diet: a surgeon blind, randomized and controlled trial

International society of sports nutrition position stand: nutrition and weight cut strategies for mixed martial arts and other combat sports

Following an extensive literature review, the International Society of Sports Nutrition (ISSN) has developed an official position on nutritional and weight cut strategies for combat sports. The type of combat sport, length of the fight camp, and time between weigh-in and competition are factors influencing nutritional and weight cut strategies. The following 16 points constitute the Position Statement of the Society; the Research Committee has approved them. 1. Combat sports have differing weight categories, official weigh-in times, and competition frequencies, influencing the nutritional and weight cut strategies for training and competition. 2. As the duration of a combat match increases, >4 min, contribution of the aerobic system can rise to >70%, yet anaerobic alactic pathways and anaerobic glycolytic pathways support high-output bursts. 3. During the off camp/general preparation phase, athletes should maintain a weight ranging 12% to 15% above the weight division requirement. 4. Supplements including creatine, beta-alanine, beta-hydroxy-beta-methylbutyrate, and caffeine have been shown to enhance performance and/or recovery during preparation phases, competition, and post-competition. 5. During fight camp, strategic decreases in calorie intake are necessary for an efficient longitudinal weight descent. Individual caloric needs can be determined using indirect calorimetry or validated equations such as Mifflin St. Jeor or Cunningham. 6. Protein should be prioritized during longitudinal weight descents to preserve lean body mass, and the timely delivery of carbohydrates supports training demands. Macronutrients should not drop below the following: carbohydrates 3.0-4.0 g/kg, protein 1.2-2.0 g/kg, and fat 0.5 to 1.0 g/kg/day. 7. Suitable losses in body mass range from 6.7% at 72 h, 5.7% at 48 h, and 4.4% at 24 h, prior to weigh-in. 8. Sodium restriction and water loading are effective for inducing polyuria and acute water loss. 9. During fight week, water-bound glycogen stores can be depleted through exercise and carbohydrate restriction, facilitating a 1% to 2% loss in body mass, with equivalent losses from a low-fiber intake of <10 g/day for 4 days. 10. During fight week, acute water loss strategies, including sauna, hot water immersion, and mummy wraps, can be used effectively with appropriate supervision (optimally ~2-4% of body mass within 24 h of weigh-in). 11. Post-weigh-in, rapid weight gain strategies are utilized to recover lost body fluid/mass before competition with the intent of gaining a competitive advantage. 12. Oral rehydration solutions (1 to 1.5 liters/h) combined with a sodium range of 50-90 mmol/dL should take precedence immediately post-weigh-in. 13. Fast-acting carbohydrates at a tolerable rate of ≤ 60 g/h should follow oral rehydration solutions. Post weigh-in intake of fiber should be limited to avoid gastrointestinal distress. 14. Post-weigh-in carbohydrate intake at 8-12 g/kg may be appropriate for combat athletes that undertook significant glycogen depletion strategies during fight week. About 4-7 g/kg may be suitable for modest carbohydrate restriction. 15. Post weigh-in, rehydration/refueling protocols should aim to regain ≥10% of body mass to mitigate declines in performance and the negative effects of rapid weight loss. 16. The long-term effects of frequent weight cuts on health and performance are unknown, necessitating further research.

One-day low-residue diet is equally effective as the multiple-day low-residue diet in achieving adequate bowel cleansing: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Colonoscopy is widely used as a diagnostic and preventive procedure for colorectal diseases. The most recent guidelines advocate the use of a low-residue diet (LRD) for bowel preparation before colonoscopy. LRD duration varies considerably, with recommended 1-day and multiple-day regimens in clinical practice.

METHODS

We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched multiple databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and analyzed the outcomes using a fixed-effects model.

RESULTS

Six RCTs with 2,469 subjects were included in this study. The rates of adequate bowel preparation for 1-day and >1-day were 87.2% and 87.1%, respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed between the 1-day and >1-day LRD in adequate bowel preparation (odds ratio [OR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-1.41; p=0.84; I2=0%), polyp detection rate (OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.76-1.09; p=0.29; I2=16%), adenoma detection rate (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.71-1.08; p=0.21; I2=0%), and withdrawal time (mean difference, -0.01; 95% CI, -0.25 to 0.24; p=0.97; I2=63%).

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of 1-day and multiple-day LRD is comparable in achieving satisfactory bowel preparation, highlighting their similar impact on the detection of polyps and adenomas during colonoscopy.

The efficacy of preoperative low-residue diet on postoperative ileus following cesarean section

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of preoperative low-residue diet on postoperative ileus in women undergoing elective cesarean section (CS).

METHODS

This is a surgeon-blind, randomized controlled trial enrolling pregnant women at ≥39 weeks of gestation undergoing elective CS. Patients were preoperatively randomized to receive either low-residue diet (arm A) or free diet (arm B) starting from three days before surgery. The primary outcome was the postoperative ileus. The secondary outcomes were the postoperative pain (assessed through VAS scale), the quality of the surgical field (scored using a 5-point scale, from poor to excellent), postoperative complications, and the length of hospital stay. Perioperative data were collected and compared between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 166 patients were enrolled and randomized in arm A (n = 83) and arm B (n = 83). Postoperative ileus over 24 h was significantly shorter in arm A, compared to arm B (19.3% vs 36.2%). The surgical evaluation of small intestine was scored ≥3 in 96.4% of arm A patients versus 80.7% in arm B, while evaluation of large intestine, respectively, in 97.7% and 81.9%. Postoperative pain after 12 h from CS was significantly lower in arm A (VAS, 3.4 ± 1.7) compared to arm B (VAS, 4.1 ± 1.8). There were no significant differences as regards postoperative pain at 24 and 48 h, nausea/vomit, surgical complications, and hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of a preoperative low-residue diet for women scheduled for elective CS would reduce postoperative ileus and pain. Further large-scale studies are required before translating these research findings into routine obstetrical practice.

Preoperative Mechanical Bowel Preparation for Gynecologic Surgeries: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) before benign laparoscopic or vaginal gynecologic surgeries.

DATA SOURCES

Database searches of MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase (OVID), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Sciences and citations and reference lists published up to December 2021.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials in any language comparing MBP with no preparation were included. Two reviewers independently screened 925 records and extracted data from 12 selected articles and assessed the risk of bias with the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials tool. A random-effects model was used for the analysis. Surgeon findings (surgical field view, quality of bowel handling and bowel preparation), operative outcomes (blood loss, operative time, length of stay, surgical site infection), and patient's preoperative symptoms and satisfaction were collected.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

Thirteen studies (1715 patients) assessing oral and rectal preparations before laparoscopic and vaginal gynecologic surgeries were included. No significant differences were observed with or without MBP on surgical field view (primary outcome, risk ratio [RR] 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97-1.05, p = .66, I2 = 0%), bowel handling (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.95-1.08, p = .78, I2 = 67%), or bowel preparation. In addition, there were no statistically significant differences in perioperative findings. MBP was associated with increased pain (mean difference [MD] 11.62[2.80-20.44], I2 = 76, p = .01), weakness (MD 10.73[0.60-20.87], I2 = 94, p = .04), hunger (MD 17.52 [8.04-27.00], I2 = 83, p = .0003), insomnia (MD 10.13[0.57-19.68], I2 = 82, p = .04), and lower satisfaction (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53-0.87, I2 = 76%, p = .002) compared with controls.

CONCLUSIONS

MBP has not been associated with improved surgical field view, bowel handling, or operative outcome. However, in view of the adverse effects induced, its routine use before benign gynecologic surgeries should be abandoned.

One-Day versus Three-Day Low-Residue Diet and Bowel Preparation Quality before Colonoscopy: A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

One-day low-residue diet (LRD) is recommended before colonoscopy, but only three single-center trials compared the 1-day versus 3-day LRD. The aim of this multicenter study was to compare the impact of a 3-day versus 1-day LRD on its ability to adequately and successfully prepare the bowel of outpatients that require a colonoscopy. The outpatients' tolerance and adherence to the LRD were also considered.

METHODS

Consecutive outpatients were randomized to 1-day versus 3-day LRD at three open-access endoscopy units. The primary endpoint consisted of the proportion of patients with a satisfactory degree of bowel cleanliness (Score 2-3 on the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale [BBPS] in each segment). Secondary endpoints were patients' tolerance and adherence to the prescribed diet evaluated by a standardized questionnaire.

RESULTS

289 patients were included in the study (1-day LRD arm = 143, 3-day LRD arm = 146). BBPS ≥2 was not significantly different in the two dietary regimens in any of the three colonic segments (71% vs. 72%, p = 0.9). The percentage of patients with incomplete preparation was similar in the two arms (9% vs. 9%; p = 1.0). No significant differences were found among colonoscopy findings in terms of abnormalities (81% vs. 84%, p = 0.8). Both groups scored similarly in overall tolerance to LRD (48% vs. 49%, p = 1.0) and also in whether they would have adopted a different dietary regimen (p = 0.3).

CONCLUSION

Our multicenter randomized study confirmed that optimal bowel cleansing is reached through a 1-day LRD.

Minimally invasive anesthesia for laparoscopic hysterectomy: a case series

PURPOSE

Regional anesthesia (RA) is considered as a "minimally invasive technique" to achieve anesthesia. To assess the feasibility and the perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic hysterectomy in regional anesthesia from the point of view of the surgeon, anesthesiologist and patient.

METHODS

A retrospective search was performed to identify patients who underwent laparoscopic hysterectomy under RA from April 2020 to September 2021. Five patients affected by benign gynecological disease (atypical endometrial hyperplasia or uterine leiomyomas) were included.

RESULTS

The postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting (PONV) and the antiemetic/analgesic intake were evaluated. Postoperative surgical and anesthesiological variables were recorded. Duration of surgery was 84 ± 4.18 and no conversion to GA was required. According to VAS score, the postoperative pain during the whole observation time was less than 4 (median). A faster resumption of bowel motility (≤ 9 h) and patient's mobilization (≤ 4 h) were observed as well as a low incidence of post-operative nausea and vomit. Early discharge and greater patient's satisfaction were recorded. Intraoperatively pain score was assessed on Likert scale during all the stages of laparoscopy in RA, with only 2 patients complaining scarce pain (= 2) at pneumoperitoneum.

CONCLUSION

RA showed to have a great impact on surgical stress and to guarantee a quicker recovery without compromising surgical results. RA technique could be a viable option for patients undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy.

A Short-Term Low-Fiber Diet Reduces Body Mass in Healthy Young Men: Implications for Weight-Sensitive Sports

Athletes from weight-sensitive sports are reported to consume low-fiber diets (LOW) to induce acute reductions in body mass (BM). However, evidence supporting their efficacy is anecdotal. Therefore, we aimed to determine the effect of a LOW on acute changes in BM. Nineteen healthy males (32 ± 10 years, 1.79 ± 0.07 m, 77.5 ± 8.1 kg) consumed their habitual diet (∼30 g fiber/day) for 7 consecutive days followed by 4 days of a LOW (<10 g fiber/day) that was matched for energy and macronutrient content. Participants also matched their daily exercise load during LOW to that completed during habitual diet (p = .669, average 257 ± 141 arbitrary units). BM was significantly reduced in LOW versus habitual diet after 4 days (Δ = 0.40 ± 0.77 kg or 0.49% ± 0.91%, p < .05, effect size [ES] [95% confidence interval] = -0.53 [-1.17, 0.12]) and on the morning of Day 5 (Δ = 0.58 ± 0.83 kg or 0.74% ± 0.99%, p < .01, ES = -0.69 [-1.34, -0.03]). LOW resulted in moderately higher hunger (Δ = 5 ± 9 mm, p = .015, ES = 0.55 [-0.09, 1.20]), a decline in stool frequency from 2 ± 0 to 1 ± 0 bowel movements per day (p = .012, ES = 0.64 [-0.02, 1.29]) and stool softness decrease (p = .005). Nonetheless, participants reported the diet to be tolerable (n = 18/19) and were willing to repeat it (n = 16/19). Data demonstrate for the first time that consumption of a short-term LOW induces reductions in BM.

Optimising working space for laparoscopic pyeloplasty in infants: Preliminary observations with the SGPGI Protocol

AIMS

This study aimed to test the efficacy of SGPGI protocol to minimise bowel distension and optimise working space for laparoscopic pyeloplasty in infants.

METHODOLOGY

All infants who underwent laparoscopic pyeloplasty for unilateral pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction (PUJO) between January 2017 and March 2020 were included in the study. The patient cohort was divided into two groups: Group A and B. Group A included patients who underwent routine pre-operative preparation. Group B included patients wherein the SGPGI protocol was used. The key features of the protocol were fasting for 8 h, enemas, inserting a nasogastric tube in the pre-operative period and decompressing the colon on the operation table. Demographic features, pre-operative, intraoperative and post-operative parameters were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

A total of 26 infants with unilateral PUJO underwent laparoscopic pyeloplasty during the study period. Group A included 12 patients and Group B included 14 patients. Both the groups were similar in age, weight and sex distribution. The median surgeon's rating score for suturing conditions was 2 for Group A and 5 for Group B patients (P > 0.05). The operating time was significantly longer in Group A (196 ± 21 min) as compared to Group B (114 ± 18 min) (P < 0.05). In Group A, intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) varied between 9 and 14 mmHg (median 12 mmHg), while in Group B, IAP varied between 6 and 9 mmHg (median 8 mmHg) (P < 0.05). In Group A, in 2/12 cases (16.7%), conversion to an open procedure was necessary because of inadequate working space owing to gross intestinal distension. Two patients in Group A also had intraoperative injuries to adjacent structures due to poor working space.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimal working space is critical to the performance of advanced laparoscopic surgery like pyeloplasty in infants. SGPGI protocol significantly improves working space, which permits a faster and safer surgery with a lower intra-abdominal working pressure. This protocol is simple, safe and easy to replicate at most centres in our country.

ESPEN guideline on hospital nutrition

In hospitals through Europe and worldwide, the practices regarding hospital diets are very heterogeneous. Hospital diets are rarely prescribed by physicians, and sometimes the choices of diets are based on arbitrary reasons. Often prescriptions are made independently from the evaluation of nutritional status, and without taking into account the nutritional status. Therapeutic diets (low salt, gluten-free, texture and consistency modified, …) are associated with decreased energy delivery (i.e. underfeeding) and increased risk of malnutrition. The European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) proposes here evidence-based recommendations regarding the organization of food catering, the prescriptions and indications of diets, as well as monitoring of food intake at hospital, rehabilitation center, and nursing home, all of these by taking into account the patient perspectives. We propose a systematic approach to adapt the hospital food to the nutritional status and potential food allergy or intolerances. Particular conditions such as patients with dysphagia, older patients, gastrointestinal diseases, abdominal surgery, diabetes, and obesity, are discussed to guide the practitioner toward the best evidence based therapy. The terminology of the different useful diets is defined. The general objectives are to increase the awareness of physicians, dietitians, nurses, kitchen managers, and stakeholders towards the pivotal role of hospital food in hospital care, to contribute to patient safety within nutritional care, to improve coverage of nutritional needs by hospital food, and reduce the risk of malnutrition and its related complications.

Mechanical bowel preparation prior to gynaecological laparoscopy enables better operative field visualization, lower pneumoperitoneum pressure and Trendelenburg angle during the surgery: a perspective that may add to patient safety

Background: To find the effects of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) on operative field visualization, and to measure pneumoperitoneum pressure (PP) and Trendelenburg inclination angle (TIA) values. Methods: In this two-centred, randomised, single-blind and controlled study, 90 patients who underwent laparoscopic gynaecological surgery for benign conditions were included. After the exclusions, 44 patients received MBP with oral sodium phosphate enema (study group) and 42 did not receive bowel preparation or underwent diet restrictions (control group). An objective visual index, PP and TIA were measured in a stepwise design of assessments. Results: The Visual Index at first inspection right after establishing a 12 mmHg PP and a standard 30∘ TIA was found to be significantly in favour of the study group (p = 0.015). The lowest reached TIA in standard 12 mmHg PP following stepwise decrease was observed as 15.2∘ and 25∘ in the study and control groups, respectively (p < 0.001). The lowest reached PP was 8.9 mmHg and 11.9 mmHg in the study and control groups, respectively (p < 0.001). Patients who received MBP reported significantly higher levels of negative discomfort measures (p < 0.032), however 80% of those reported MBP as acceptable. Conclusion: Significantly better operative field visualization, lower TIA and PP was achieved with MBP. MBP enabled a decrement of either 10∘ in TIA or 3 mmHg in PP with an adequate operative field to proceed safely for the benign gynaecological laparoscopic operations in exchange for acceptable discomfort for the patients.

Mechanical bowel preparation before gynecologic laparoscopic procedures: Is it time to abandon this practice?

AIM

To examine the influence of mechanical bowel preparation on surgical field visualization and patients' quality of life during benign gynecologic laparoscopic procedures.

METHODS

A single blind, randomized, controlled trial was undertaken with laparoscopic gynecologic surgical patients to one of the following three groups: liquid diet on the preoperative day; mechanical bowel preparation with oral polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution; minimal residue diet for 3 days. Primary outcomes included assessment of the condition of small and large bowel and the overall quality of the surgical field. Additional measures included assessment of patients' preoperative symptoms, tolerance of the preparation method and compliance to the protocol, postoperative symptoms and bowel function.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-four patients were randomized as follows: 49 to liquid diet, 47 to mechanical bowel preparation, and 48 to minimal residue diet. Most characteristics were similar across groups. The intraoperative surgical view and the condition of large and small bowel were equal or inferior at the patients who received mechanical bowel preparation compared with the other groups. The 4-point Likert scale scoring for small bowel (2.51 vs. 2.72 vs. 2.81, p = 0.04), large bowel (2.26 vs. 2.38 vs. 2.48, p = 0.32) and overall operative field quality (2.34 vs. 2.67 vs. 2.67, p = 0.03) demonstrated no advantage from the use of preoperative mechanical bowel preparation over liquid diet and minimal residue diet, respectively. Preoperative discomfort was significantly greater in the mechanical bowel preparation group.

CONCLUSION

Mechanical bowel preparation before gynecologic laparoscopic operations for benign pathology could be safely abandoned.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN registry, https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN59502124 (No 59502124).

Diverticulitis: An Update From the Age Old Paradigm

For a disease process that affects so many, we continue to struggle to define optimal care for patients with diverticular disease. Part of this stems from the fact that diverticular disease requires different treatment strategies across the natural history- acute, chronic and recurrent.

To understand where we are currently, it is worth understanding how treatment of diverticular disease has evolved. Diverticular disease was rarely described in the literature prior to the 1900’s. In the late 1960’s and early 1970’s, Painter and Burkitt popularized the theory that diverticulosis is a disease of Western civilization based on the observation that diverticulosis was rare in rural Africa but common in economically developed countries. Previous surgical guidelines focused on early operative intervention to avoid potential complicated episodes of recurrent complicated diverticulitis (e.g., with free perforation) that might necessitate emergent surgery and stoma formation. More recent data has challenged prior concerns about decreasing effectiveness of medical management with repeat episodes and the notion that the natural history of diverticulitis is progressive. It has also permitted more accurate grading of the severity of disease and permitted less invasive management options to attempt conversion of urgent operations into the elective setting, or even avoid an operation altogether.

The role of diet in preventing diverticular disease has long been debated. A high fiber diet appears to decrease the likelihood of symptomatic diverticulitis. The myth of avoid eating nuts, corn, popcorn, and seeds to prevent episodes of diverticulitis has been debunked with modern data. Overall, the recommendations for “diverticulitis diets” mirror those made for overall healthy lifestyle – high fiber, with a focus on whole grains, fruits and vegetables.

Diverticulosis is one of the most common incidental findings on colonoscopy and the eighth most common outpatient diagnosis in the United States. Over 50% of people over the age of 60 and over 60% of people over age 80 have colonic diverticula. Of those with diverticulosis, the lifetime risk of developing diverticulitis is estimated at 10–25%, although more recent studies estimate a 5% rate of progression to diverticulitis. Diverticulitis accounts for an estimated 371,000 emergency department visits and 200,000 inpatient admissions per year with annual cost of 2.1–2.6 billion dollars per year in the United States. The estimated total medical expenditure (inpatient and outpatient) for diverticulosis and diverticulitis in 2015 was over 5.4 billion dollars. The incidence of diverticulitis is increasing.

Besides increasing age, other risk factors for diverticular disease include use of NSAIDS, aspirin, steroids, opioids, smoking and sedentary lifestyle. Diverticula most commonly occur along the mesenteric side of the antimesenteric taeniae resulting in parallel rows. These spots are thought to be relatively weak as this is the location where vasa recta penetrate the muscle to supply the mucosa. The exact mechanism that leads to diverticulitis from diverticulosis is not definitively known.

The most common presenting complaint is of left lower quadrant abdominal pain with symptoms of systemic unwellness including fever and malaise, however the presentation may vary widely. The gold standard cross-sectional imaging is multi-detector CT. It is minimally invasive and has sensitivity between 98% and specificity up to 99% for diagnosing acute diverticulitis. Uncomplicated acute diverticulitis may be safely managed as an out-patient in carefully selected patients. Hospitalization is usually necessary for patients with immunosuppression, intolerance to oral intake, signs of severe sepsis, lack of social support and increased comorbidities. The role of antibiotics has been questioned in a number of randomized controlled trials and it is likely that we will see more patients with uncomplicated disease treated with observation in the future

Acute diverticulitis can be further sub classified into complicated and uncomplicated presentations. Uncomplicated diverticulitis is characterized by inflammation limited to colonic wall and surrounding tissue. The management of uncomplicated diverticulitis is changing. Use of antibiotics has been questioned as it appears that antibiotic use can be avoided in select groups of patients. Surgical intervention appears to improve patient’s quality of life. The decision to proceed with surgery is recommended in an individualized manner.

Complicated diverticulitis is defined as diverticulitis associated with localized or generalized perforation, localized or distant abscess, fistula, stricture or obstruction. Abscesses can be treated with percutaneous drainage if the abscess is large enough. The optimal long-term strategy for patients who undergo successful non-operative management of their diverticular abscess remains controversial. There are clearly patients who would do well with an elective colectomy and a subset who could avoid an operation all together however, the challenge is appropriate risk-stratification and patient selection. Management of patients with perforation depends greatly on the presence of feculent or purulent peritonitis, the extent of contamination and hemodynamic status and associated comorbidities. Fistulas and strictures are almost always treated with segmental colectomy.

After an episode of acute diverticulitis, routine colonoscopy has been recommended by a number of societies to exclude the presence of colorectal cancer or presence of alternative diagnosis like ischemic colitis or inflammatory bowel disease for the clinical presentation. Endoscopic evaluation of the colon is normally delayed by about 6 weeks from the acute episode to reduce the risk associated with colonoscopy. Further study has questioned the need for endoscopic evaluation for every patient with acute diverticulitis. Colonoscopy should be routinely performed after complicated diverticulitis cases, when the clinical presentation is atypical or if there are any diagnostic ambiguity, or patient has other indications for colonoscopy like rectal bleeding or is above 50 years of age without recent colonoscopy.

For patients in whom elective colectomy is indicated, it is imperative to identify a wide range of modifiable patient co-morbidities. Every attempt should be made to improve a patient’s chance of successful surgery. This includes optimization of patient risk factors as well as tailoring the surgical approach and perioperative management. A positive outcome depends greatly on thoughtful attention to what makes a complicated patient “complicated”.

Operative management remains complex and depends on multiple factors including patient age, comorbidities, nutritional state, severity of disease, and surgeon preference and experience. Importantly, the status of surgery, elective versus urgent or emergent operation, is pivotal in decision-making, and treatment algorithms are divergent based on the acuteness of surgery. Resection of diseased bowel to healthy proximal colon and rectal margins remains a fundamental principle of treatment although the operative approach may vary.

For acute diverticulitis, a number of surgical approaches exist, including loop colostomy, sigmoidectomy with colostomy (Hartmann’s procedure) and sigmoidectomy with primary colorectal anastomosis. Overall, data suggest that primary anastomosis is preferable to a Hartman’s procedure in select patients with acute diverticulitis. Patients with hemodynamic instability, immunocompromised state, feculent peritonitis, severely edematous or ischemic bowel, or significant malnutrition are poor candidates. The decision to divert after colorectal anastomosis is at the discretion of the operating surgeon. Patient factors including severity of disease, tissue quality, and comorbidities should be considered. Technical considerations for elective cases include appropriate bowel preparation, the use of a laparoscopic approach, the decision to perform a primary anastomosis, and the selected use of ureteral stents.

Management of the patient with an end colostomy after a Hartmann’s procedure for acute diverticulitis can be a challenging clinical scenario. Between 20 – 50% of patients treated with sigmoid resection and an end colostomy after an initial severe bout of diverticulitis will never be reversed to their normal anatomy. The reasons for high rates of permanent colostomies are multifactorial. The debate on the best timing for a colostomy takedown continues. Six months is generally chosen as the safest time to proceed when adhesions may be at their softest allowing for a more favorable dissection. The surgical approach will be a personal decision by the operating surgeon based on his or her experience. Colostomy takedown operations are challenging surgeries. The surgeon should anticipate and appropriately plan for a long and difficult operation. The patient should undergo a full antibiotic bowel preparation. Preoperative planning is critical; review the initial operative note and defining the anatomy prior to reversal. When a complex abdominal wall closure is necessary, consider consultation with a hernia specialist. Open surgery is the preferred surgical approach for the majority of colostomy takedown operations. Finally, consider ureteral catheters, diverting loop ileostomy, and be prepared for all anastomotic options in advance.

Since its inception in the late 90’s, laparoscopic lavage has been recognized as a novel treatment modality in the management of complicated diverticulitis; specifically, Hinchey III (purulent) diverticulitis. Over the last decade, it has been the subject of several randomized controlled trials, retrospective studies, systematic reviews as well as cost-efficiency analyses. Despite being the subject of much debate and controversy, there is a clear role for laparoscopic lavage in the management of acute diverticulitis with the caveat that patient selection is key.

Segmental colitis associated with diverticulitis (SCAD) is an inflammatory condition affecting the colon in segments that are also affected by diverticulosis, namely, the sigmoid colon. While SCAD is considered a separate clinical entity, it is frequently confused with diverticulitis or inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). SCAD affects approximately 1.4% of the general population and 1.15 to 11.4% of those with diverticulosis and most commonly affects those in their 6th decade of life. The exact pathogenesis of SCAD is unknown, but proposed mechanisms include mucosal redundancy and prolapse occurring in diverticular segments, fecal stasis, and localized ischemia. Most case of SCAD resolve with a high-fiber diet and antibiotics, with salicylates reserved for more severe cases. Relapse is uncommon and immunosuppression with steroids is rarely needed. A relapsing clinical course may suggest a diagnosis of IBD and treatment as such should be initiated. Surgery is extremely uncommon and reserved for severe refractory disease.

While sigmoid colon involvement is considered the most common site of colonic diverticulitis in Western countries, diverticular disease can be problematic in other areas of the colon. In Asian countries, right-sided diverticulitis outnumbers the left. This difference seems to be secondary to dietary and genetic factors. Differential diagnosis might be difficult because of similarity with appendicitis. However accurate imaging studies allow a precise preoperative diagnosis and management planning. Transverse colonic diverticulitis is very rare accounting for less than 1% of colonic diverticulitis with a perforation rate that has been estimated to be even more rare. Rectal diverticula are mostly asymptomatic and diagnosed incidentally in the majority of patients and rarely require treatment. Giant colonic diverticula (GCD) is a rare presentation of diverticular disease of the colon and it is defined as an air-filled cystic diverticulum larger than 4 cm in diameter. The pathogenesis of GCD is not well defined.

Overall, the management of diverticular disease depends greatly on patient, disease and surgeon factors. Only by tailoring treatment to the patient in front of us can we achieve optimal outcomes.

Controversies in preoperative bowel preparation in gynecologic and gynecologic oncology surgery: a review of the literature

PURPOSE

The purpose of this review is to assess the impact of mechanical and oral antibiotics bowel preparation on surgical performance and to investigate their role before gynecologic surgical procedures regarding the infection rates. We also aim to study the updated evidence regarding the use of these different types of bowel preparation, as well as the current preoperative practice applied.

METHODS

An extensive search of the literature was conducted with Medline/PubMed, and the Cochrane Library Database of Systematic Reviews being used for our primary search.

RESULTS

To date, due to the conflicting guidelines by the scientific societies, surgeons do not use a specific pattern of bowel preparation regimen. There are no strong evidence supporting mechanical bowel preparation, but instead, in many cases, patients' adverse effects, both physiological and psychological have been noted. On the other hand, the combined use of oral antibiotic and mechanical bowel preparation has been proven beneficial in colorectal surgery in reducing postoperative morbidities.

CONCLUSION

Based on current literature, in gynecologic surgeries with minimal probability of intraluminal entry, a regimen without any bowel preparation should be applied. The combined administration of both mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation, or even the use of the oral antibiotics alone, should be preserved for cases of increased complexity, where bowel involvement is highly anticipated, such as in gynecologic oncology, as stated in the ERAS protocols. Nonetheless, further research specific to gynecologic surgery is required.

Effect of the High-FODMAP Diet on Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy: A Multicenter, Prospective Cohort Study

Background

Optimal bowel preparation for colonoscopy is fundamental to a successful examination. The FODMAP diet can increase the content of intestinal water and gas, but its impact on bowel cleanliness and bubbles has not been reported. This study was therefore aimed at evaluating the effect of the FODMAP diet on the quality of bowel preparation and the adenoma detection rate (ADR).

Methods

This was a multicenter, prospective cohort study involving consecutive patients who underwent colonoscopy in two centers in China. Patients were assigned to one of two groups: high-FODMAP or nonhigh-FODMAP diet. ODMP Software was used for the identification of FODMAP diet types. The primary outcome was ADR; secondary outcomes were the quality of bowel preparation, measured by the Boston bowel preparation scale and bubble scores.

Results

There were 365 patients included. Patients in the high-FODMAP-diet group showed poor bowel cleansing efficacy: BBPS ≥ 6 in 76.8% vs. 90.3% (P < 0.01) and bubble scores of 2.42 ± 1.69 vs. 1.32 ± 1.63 (P < 0.001). The intubation time was significantly longer in the high-FODMAP-diet group (7.07 ± 5.18 vs. 5.46 ± 3.05 min; P = 0.002). The High-FODMAP diet was an independent risk predictor for inadequate bowel preparation. There were no statistically significant differences in ADR between the two dietary groups.

Conclusion

The high-FODMAP diet significantly reduced the quality of bowel preparation. We recommend the consumption of nonhigh-FODMAP diet in bowel preparation as a reference standard for dietary regimen. This method was effective, flexible, referable, and well tolerated, which could help to provide patients a valuable dietary guidance in bowel preparation.

Preoperative Bowel Preparation in Minimally Invasive and Vaginal Gynecologic Surgery

Bowel preparation traditionally refers to the removal of bowel contents via mechanical cleansing measures. Although it has been a common practice for more than 70 years, its use is based mostly on expert opinion rather than solid evidence. Mechanical bowel preparation in minimally invasive and vaginal gynecologic surgery is strongly debated, since many studies have not confirmed its effectiveness, neither in reducing postoperative infectious morbidity nor in improving surgeons' performance. A comprehensive search of Medline/PubMed and the Cochrane Library Database was conducted, for related articles up to June 2019, including terms such as "mechanical bowel preparation," "vaginal surgery," "minimally invasive," and "gynecology." We aimed to determine the best practice regarding bowel preparation before these surgical approaches. In previous studies, bowel preparation was evaluated only via mechanical measures. The identified randomized trials in laparoscopic approach and in vaginal surgery were 8 and 4, respectively. Most of them compare different types of preparation, with patients being separated into groups of oral laxatives, rectal measures (enema), low residue diet, and fasting. The outcomes of interest are the quality of the surgical field, postoperative infectious complications, length of hospital stay, and patients' comfort during the whole procedure. The results are almost identical regardless of the procedure's type. Routine administration of bowel preparation seems to offer no advantage to any of the objectives mentioned above. Taking into consideration the fact that in most gynecologic cases there is minimal probability of bowel intraluminal entry and, thus, low surgical site infection rates, most scientific societies have issued guidelines against the use of any bowel preparation regimen before laparoscopic or vaginal surgery. Nonetheless, surgeons still do not use a specific pattern and continue ordering them. However, according to recent evidence, preoperative bowel preparation of any type should be omitted prior to minimally invasive and vaginal gynecologic surgeries.

A 3-day low-fibre diet does not improve colonoscopy preparation results compared to a 1-day diet: A randomized, single-blind, controlled trial

Background

Although a 1-day low-fibre diet before colonoscopy is currently recommended, some endoscopists prescribe a 3-day diet.

Objective

The objective of this study was to compare the influence of a 3-day versus a 1-day low-fibre diet on bowel preparation quality, patient tolerability and adherence.

Methods

Outpatients scheduled for total colonoscopy were randomized in two groups, 3-day versus 1-day low-fibre diet, performing a 4-litre polyethylene glycol split-dose. The primary outcome was a reduction of inappropriate preparations in the 3-day low-fibre diet arm from 15% to 5% (bowel preparation was assessed by the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale). Secondary outcomes were adherence to, difficulty to perform, difficulty to obtain and willingness to repeat the diet. Intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analyses were conducted for the primary outcome.

Results

A total of 412 patients were randomized (206 per group). Bowel preparation quality was similar between groups. On ITT analysis (n = 412), adequate bowel preparation was 91.7% (3-day diet) versus 94.7% (1-day diet), p = 0.24 and on PP analysis (n = 400) 93.5% versus 96.5%, respectively, p = 0.16. Difficulty to perform the diet was significantly higher on the 3-day diet, p = 0.04. No differences were found on difficulty to obtain the diet, willingness to repeat the diet, adverse events and intra-colonoscopy findings.

Conclusion

A 3-day low-fibre diet does not bring benefit to the bowel preparation quality and is harder to perform than a 1-day diet.

Does Mechanical Bowel Preparation Ameliorate Surgical Performance in Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion?

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective case-control study.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) improve surgical performance and decrease operative complications in anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF).

METHODS

This study involved a retrospective analysis of 48 consecutive patients who underwent ALIF with MBP and a control cohort of 50 consecutive patients who underwent the same surgeries without MBP. The quality of each surgical procedure, operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), intraoperative complications, changes in vital signs and patient symptoms on the day of surgery, and bowel function postoperatively were also compared between the procedures.

RESULTS

Baseline demographic characteristics were similar between the 2 groups (all Ps > .05). The quality of each procedure, operative time, EBL, intraoperative complications, and changes in body temperature and heart rate were not different between the groups (all Ps > .05). The MBP group showed more headache, tiredness, thirst, and abdominal discomfort (all Ps < .001) and decrease of the systolic blood pressure (P = .041) on the day of surgery. The return of bowel movement was not different between the groups (P = .278).

CONCLUSIONS

Given the similar surgical result with the substantial patient discomfort, MBP can be omitted in ALIF.

The Effect of Water Loading on Acute Weight Loss Following Fluid Restriction in Combat Sports Athletes

Novel methods of acute weight loss practiced by combat sport athletes include “water loading,” the consumption of large fluid volumes for several days prior to restriction. We examined claims that this technique increases total body water losses, while also assessing the risk of hyponatremia. Male athletes were separated into control (n = 10) and water loading (n = 11) groups and fed a standardized energy-matched diet for 6 days. Days 1–3 fluid intake was 40 and 100 ml/kg for control and water loading groups, respectively, with both groups consuming 15 ml/kg on Day 4 and following the same rehydration protocol on Days 5 and 6. We tracked body mass (BM), urine sodium, urine specific gravity and volume, training-related sweat losses and blood concentrations of renal hormones, and urea and electrolytes throughout. Physical performance was assessed preintervention and postintervention. Following fluid restriction, there were substantial differences between groups in the ratio of fluid input/output (39%, p < .01, effect size = 1.2) and BM loss (0.6% BM, p = .02, effect size = 0.82). Changes in urine specific gravity, urea and electrolytes, and renal hormones occurred over time (p < .05), with an interaction of time and intervention on blood sodium, potassium, chloride, urea, creatinine, urine specific gravity, and vasopressin (p < .05). Measurements of urea and electrolyte remained within reference ranges, and no differences in physical performance were detected over time or between groups. Water loading appears to be a safe and effective method of acute BM loss under the conditions of this study. Vasopressin-regulated changes in aquaporin channels may potentially partially explain the mechanism of increased body water loss with water loading.

Bowel injury following gynecological laparoscopic surgery

Background

Bowel injury remains a serious complication of gynecological laparoscopic surgery. We aimed to review the literature on this topic, combined with personal experiences, so as to give recommendations on how to avoid and manage this complication.

Methods

We performed a narrative review on bowel injury following gynecological laparoscopic surgery using PubMed covering prevention, diagnosis, and management. Search terms used were laparoscopy, gynaecology, injury, bowel, prevention, treatment.

Results

Important principles of prevention include proper pre-operative evaluation and increased laparoscopic surgical skills and knowledge. High clinical suspicion is crucial for early diagnosis. Diagnostic workup of suspected cases includes serial abdominal examination, measuring inflammatory markers, and performing imaging studies including abdominal ultrasound and CT scan. When bowel injury is recognized during the first laparoscopic procedure then laparoscopic primary suturing could be tried although laparotomy may be needed. When diagnosis is delayed, then laparotomy is the treatment of choice. The role of robotic surgery and three-dimensional laparoscopic gynecological surgery on bowel injury needs to be further assessed.

Conclusion

Early recognition of bowel injury is crucial for a favorable clinical outcome. A combined collaboration between gynecologists and general surgeons is important for timely and proper decisions to be made.

Evaluating Mechanical Bowel Preparation Prior to Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy

Background and Objectives:

Mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) has been used prior to total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH), but evidence for its use is lacking. Our study seeks to assess whether or not completion of preoperative MBP prior to TLH improves visualization of the surgical field, bowel handling, or overall ease of the operation.

Methods:

Women aged 18–65 years undergoing TLH for benign indications at a level 1 trauma center were randomized to a bowel preparation (BP; n = 39) or non–bowel preparation (NP; n = 39) regimen. After each operation, the surgeon completed a survey about intraoperative visualization of the surgical field, bowel handling, and the overall ease of the operation. The surgeon was also asked whether or not he thought the patient had completed MBP. The patient completed a survey about pre- and postoperative gastrointestinal discomfort. The surgeon was blinded to whether MBP was completed before the operation.

Results:

There was no difference in intraoperative visualization, bowel handling, or overall ease of the operation between the BP and NP groups. Comfort levels before and after surgery were not significantly different between the two groups. The surgeon was able to correctly predict whether the patient performed MBP in 59% of cases.

Conclusion:

The routine use of MBP before TLH does not improve intraoperative visualization, bowel handling, or overall ease of performing the procedure. It also has no significant effect on patient comfort levels. MBP is not indicated before TLH for benign indications.

Low-residue and low-fiber diets in gastrointestinal disease management

Recently, low-residue diets were removed from the American Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics' Nutrition Care Manual due to the lack of a scientifically accepted quantitative definition and the unavailability of a method to estimate the amount of food residue produced. This narrative review focuses on defining the similarities and/or discrepancies between low-residue and low-fiber diets and on the diagnostic and therapeutic values of these diets in gastrointestinal disease management. Diagnostically, a low-fiber/low-residue diet is used in bowel preparation. A bowel preparation is a cleansing of the intestines of fecal matter and secretions conducted before a diagnostic procedure. Therapeutically, a low-fiber/low-residue diet is part of the treatment of acute relapses in different bowel diseases. The available evidence on low-residue and low-fiber diets is summarized. The main findings showed that within human disease research, the terms "low residue" and "low fiber" are used interchangeably, and information related to the quantity of residue in the diet usually refers to the amount of fiber. Low-fiber/low-residue diets are further explored in both diagnostic and therapeutic situations. On the basis of this literature review, the authors suggest redefining a low-residue diet as a low-fiber diet and to quantitatively define a low-fiber diet as a diet with a maximum of 10 g fiber/d. A low-fiber diet instead of a low-residue diet is recommended as a diagnostic value or as specific therapy for gastrointestinal conditions.

Pearls and pitfalls in surgery for endometrioma

Endometrioma surgery should be planned and executed very carefully as it is associated with risks that may hamper future reproductive potential. Symptoms, age, risk of malignancy, bilaterality, ovarian reserve, and desire to have children should all be taken into account prior to surgical intervention. Cyclic and noncyclic severe pain may be an indicator or deep infiltrating diseases. Laparoscopic surgery is the gold standard, however, the issue of resection versus ablation should be further studied.

Is Mechanical Bowel Preparation Necessary for Gynecologic Surgery? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To clarify the efficacy and side effects of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) before gynecologic surgery.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted. Embase, PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in the Cochrane Library and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched. Randomized controlled trials on MBP prior to gynecologic surgery were included. The software package Revman 5.3 was used for statistical analysis. Odds ratio (OR) and standard mean deviation were calculated for dichotomous and continuous variable, respectively.

RESULTS

The quality of the included studies was moderate to good. MBP prior to laparoscopic gynecologic benign surgery or vaginal prolapse surgery has not been proven to be valuable for surgical performance, mainly involving visualization of the surgical field (OR 1.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1 to 2.32; Z = 1.95, p = 0.05), bowel handling (OR 2.21, 95% CI 0.83 to 5.84; Z = 1.59, p = 0.11), surgical complications (OR 1.3, 95% CI 0.46 to 3.67; Z = 0.5, p = 0.62) and bowel preparation. The discomfort due to oral catharsis is severer than no bowel preparation and enema, however without any difference between enema and no bowel preparation.

CONCLUSION

The routine practice of MBP before gynecologic surgery needs to be reconsidered. This traditional clinical behavior has to be abandoned before benign laparoscopic surgery. Studies on the role of MBP for gynecologic laparotomy and gynecologic cancer are urgent. © 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Is mechanical bowel preparation still necessary for gynecologic laparoscopic surgery? A meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

A number of studies have proven that mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) has no benefits in elective colorectal surgery. However, studies specifically related to gynecologic laparoscopic surgery are scant. We undertook a meta-analysis to assess the necessity of MBP before gynecologic laparoscopic surgery.

METHODS

The electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched to identify relevant randomized controlled trials. Two authors independently extracted data from each study. The primary outcome of interest was the quality of surgical field. Secondary outcomes of interest included postoperative pain, abdominal swelling, nausea/vomiting, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Three studies involving 372 participants were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed that MBP did not significantly increase the overall quality of surgical field exposure (odds ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46-1.49; P = 0.52). MBP also did not appear to significantly change the mean scores of postoperative pain (weighted mean difference, 0.09; 95%CI, -0.54-0.71; P = 0.79), the incidence of nausea/vomiting (odds ratio, 1.56; 95%CI, 0.80 to 3.03; P = 0.19), the mean scores of abdominal swelling (weighted mean difference, -0.26; 95%CI, -0.83-0.30; P = 0.36), and length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference, 0.05; 95%CI, -0.13-0.22; P = 0.62).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that routine use of MBP for gynecologic laparoscopic surgery should not be recommended. However, additional randomized controlled trials using large samples are needed to confirm these findings.

Obesity in laparoscopic surgery

Since the 1980s, minimally invasive techniques have been applied to an increasing number and variety of surgical procedures with a gradual increase in the complexity of procedures being successfully performed laparoscopically. In the past, obesity was considered a contraindication to laparoscopy due to the higher risk of co-morbid conditions such as diabetes, hypertension, coronary artery disease and venous thromboembolism. Performing laparoscopic gynaecological procedures in morbidly obese patients is no longer a rare phenomenon; however, it does necessitate changes in clinical practice patterns. Understanding of the physiological changes induced by laparoscopy, particularly in obese patients, is important so that these may be counteracted and adverse outcomes avoided. Laparoscopy in obese patients confers certain advantages such as shorter hospital stay, less post-operative pain and fewer wound infections. In addition to these benefits, minimal-access surgery has been demonstrated as safe and effective in obese patients; however, specific surgical strategies and operative techniques may need to be adopted.

Evidence-based anesthesia for major gynecologic surgery

Studies on enhanced recovery after gynecological surgery are limited but seem to report outcome benefits similar to those reported after colorectal surgery. Regional anesthesia is recommended in enhanced recovery protocols. Effective regional anesthetic techniques in gynecologic surgery include spinal anesthesia, epidural analgesia, transversus abdominis plane blocks, local anesthetic wound infusions and intraperitoneal instillation catheters. Non-opioid analgesics including pregabalin, gabapentin, NSAIDs, COX-2 inhibitors, and paracetamol reduce opioid consumption after surgery. This population is at high risk for PONV, thus, a multimodal anti-emetic strategy must be employed, including strategies to reduce the baseline risk of PONV in conjunction with combination antiemetic therapy.

Systematic review of endometriosis pain assessment: how to choose a scale?

BACKGROUND

Numerous studies concerning endometriosis and pain have been reported. However, there is no consensus on the best method to evaluate pain in endometriosis and many scales have been used. Moreover, there are only a few descriptions of minimal clinically important differences after treatment (MCID) to evaluate variations in pain. In our study, we aim to identify pain scales used in endometriosis pain treatment, to address their strong and weak points and to define which would be the ideal scale to help clinicians and researchers to evaluate endometriosis-related pain.

METHODS

A search of the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases was carried out for publications in English, French or Portuguese from 1980 to December 2012, for the words: endometriosis, treatment, pain. Studies were selected if they studied an endometriosis treatment and a pain scale was specified. A quantitative and a qualitative analysis of each scale was performed to define strong and weak points of each scale (systematic registration number: CRD42013005336).

RESULTS

A total of 736 publications were identified. After excluding duplications and applying inclusion criteria 258 studies remained. We found that the visual analog scale (VAS) is the most frequently used scale. Both VAS and the numerical rating scale (NRS) show a good balance between strong and weak points in comparison with others such as the Biberoglu and Behrman scale. Concerning MCID, only VAS, NRS and Brief Pain Inventory scales have reported MCID and, among these, only VAS MCID has been studied in endometriosis patients (VAS MCID = 10 mm). Adding the Clinical Global Impression score (CGI) to the pain scale allows calculation of the MCID.

CONCLUSIONS

When using pain scales their strengths and weaknesses must be known and included in the analysis. VAS is the most frequently used pain scale and, together with NRS, seems the best adapted for endometriosis pain measurement. The use of VAS or NRS for each type of typical pain related to endometriosis (dysmenorrhea, deep dyspareunia and non-menstrual chronic pelvic pain), combined with the CGI and a quality-of-life scale will provide both clinicians and researchers with tools to evaluate treatment response.

Bowel preparation before vaginal prolapse surgery: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare surgeons' intraoperative surgeon acceptability or assessment of the operative field regarding bowel contents and patients' satisfaction with or without a mechanical bowel preparation before reconstructive vaginal prolapse surgery.

METHODS

In this single-blind, randomized trial, women scheduled to undergo vaginal prolapse surgery with a planned apical suspension and posterior colporrhaphy were allocated using block randomization to an intervention or control group. Surgeons were blinded to patient allocation. One day before surgery, mechanical bowel preparation instructions consisted of a clear liquid diet and two self-administered saline enemas; the participants in the control group sustained a regular diet and nothing by mouth after midnight. The primary outcome was surgeons' intraoperative assessment of the surgical field regarding bowel content as measured on a 4-point Likert scale (1, excellent; 4, poor). Secondary outcomes included participant satisfaction and bowel symptoms. The primary outcome was determined by intention-to-treat analysis and other analyses were per protocol.

RESULTS

Of the 150 women randomized (75 women to intervention and control group), 145 completed the study. No differences existed in the demographic, clinical, and intraoperative characteristics between groups (P>.05). Surgeons' intraoperative assessment rating was 85% "excellent or good" with bowel preparation compared with 90% for participants in the control group (odds ratio [OR] 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21-1.61; P=.30). The bowel preparation group was less likely to report "complete" satisfaction compared with the participants in the control group (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.04-0.35; P<.001). Abdominal fullness and cramping, fatigue, anal irritation, and hunger pains were greater in the bowel preparation group (all P<.01).

CONCLUSION

Before reconstructive vaginal surgery, mechanical bowel preparation conferred no benefit regarding surgeons' intraoperative assessment of the operative field, reflected decreased patient satisfaction, and had increased abdominal symptoms.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01431040.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I.

Can nutritional supplements and rectal enema be used as bowel cleansing for colonoscopy?--Results of a randomized controlled pilot study

OBJECTIVE

Currently available preparations for colonoscopy have low tolerability and may cause fluid and electrolyte shifts. An alternative method of bowel cleansing is required.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Preparation of the gut using oral nutritional supplements (ONS) and rectal enema was tested as an alternative method of bowel cleansing. During 2008-2012, patients were randomized to oral nutritional supplements (n = 27) for 5 days and rectal enema or polyethylene glycol (PEG) (n = 23) prior to colonoscopy. Blinded endoscopists rated the degree of bowel cleansing according to the Ottawa bowel preparation scale (OBS) (primary outcome). Tolerability of either preparation was also assessed

RESULTS

Due to a high rate of bowel cleansing failure among patients receiving ONS, the study was interrupted prematurely. Colonoscopies were incomplete due to stools in 6 of 27 patients in the ONS group compared to 1 of 23 in the PEG group (ns). The mean total OBS were 8.3 ± 3.3 and 5.3 ± 2.8, respectively (p = 0.002). Four patients (15%) in the ONS group and eight patients (35%) receiving PEG had an OBS score ≤4 (good preparation) (ns). ONS was better tolerated than PEG with more patients reporting acceptable taste (27 of 27 [100%] vs. 15 of 23 [65%], p = 0.001), and fewer reporting difficulties with the intake (0 of 27 [0%] vs. 10 of 23 [43%], p < 0.001) and nausea (5 of 27 [19%] vs. 13 of 23 [57%], p < 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

For routine use, ONS with enema instead of traditional preparation for colonoscopy with PEG cannot be generally recommended.

Malpractice claims and avoidance of complications in endoscopic surgery

Laparoscopy has become a valuable tool for the gynaecologist in the diagnosis and treatment of a variety of gynecological disorders. Its quicker recovery time and other advantages has benefitted countless women. Laparoscopic procedures, however, have their own associated risks and complications, and the surgeon must become thoroughly familiar with these. This awareness will help reduce patient morbidity and mortality, and potentially avoid the stress and burden of litigation, which has been increasing in recent years. Complications of gynaecologic laparoscopy include entry-related problems, and injuries to bowel, urinary tract, blood vessels, and nerves. Although some of these complications have been well described, some have emerged recently in relation to new technology and techniques. In this chapter, we discuss some of the complications of endoscopic surgery, including their incidence, prevention, and medico-legal implications, and provide a brief overview of their management.

Optimizing working-space in laparoscopy: measuring the effect of mechanical bowel preparation in a porcine model

BACKGROUND

Adequate working space is a prerequisite for safe and efficient minimal access surgery. No objective data exist in literature about the effect of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) on working space in laparoscopic surgery. We objectively measured this effect with computed tomography in a porcine laparoscopy model.

METHODS

Using standardized anesthesia, twelve 20-kg pigs without MBP and eight 20-kg pigs with MBP were studied with computed tomography at intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) levels of 0, 5, 10, and 15 mmHg. Volumes and dimensions of the pneumoperitoneum were measured on reconstructed CT images and compared between the pigs with and those without MBP.

RESULTS

A reproducible and statistically significant increase of approximately 500 ml in pneumoperitoneum volume was found in the MBP group at all levels of IAP. This represents a 43 % relative increase at a pneumoperitoneum pressure of 5 mmHg, 21 % at IAP 10 mmHg, and 18 % at IAP 15 mmHg. Peak inspiratory pressure was lower at IAP 0 and 5 mmHg in the MBP group. Anteroposterior diameter in the group with MBP was lower at 0 mmHg, but abdominal dimensions were similar in both groups at all other IAPs. This shows that the gain in working space is due to a diminished volume of the intra-abdominal content and not to compression or displacement of the bowel.

CONCLUSIONS

MBP increases working space by reducing bowel content. Especially at low intra-abdominal working pressures, the increase in working space associated with MBP could represent an important benefit in challenging laparoscopic surgery.

Multidetector computerized tomography enteroclysis vs. rectal water contrast transvaginal ultrasonography in determining the presence and extent of bowel endometriosis

OBJECTIVES

To compare the accuracy of multidetector computerized tomography enteroclysis (MDCT-e) and rectal water contrast transvaginal ultrasonography (RWC-TVS) in determining the presence and extent of bowel endometriosis.

METHODS

This prospective study included 96 patients of reproductive age with suspicion of bowel endometriosis. Patients underwent MDCT-e and RWC-TVS before operative laparoscopy. Findings of MDCT-e and RWC-TVS were compared with histological results. The severity of pain experienced during MDCT-e and RWC-TVS was measured by a 10-cm visual analog scale.

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients had bowel endometriotic nodules at surgery. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy for the diagnosis of rectosigmoid endometriosis were 95.8% (46/48), 100.0% (48/48), 100.0% (46/46), 96.0% (48/50) and 97.9% (94/96) for MDCT-e and 93.8% (45/48), 97.9% (47/48), 97.8% (45/46), 94.0% (47/50) and 95.8% (92/96) for RWC-TVS. MDCT-e was associated with more intense pain than was RWC-TVS.

CONCLUSIONS

MDCT-e and RWC-TVS have similar accuracy in the diagnosis of rectosigmoid endometriosis, but patients tolerate RWC-TVS better than they do MDCT-e.

Impact of low-residue diet on bowel preparation for colonoscopy

BACKGROUND

Few studies have focused on the effect of dietary residue on preparation for colonoscopy.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of a low-residue diet on the quality of bowel preparation.

SETTING

Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical Center, Taiwan.

PATIENTS

Eight hundred four consecutive patients (50.4 ± 11.6 y (range, 18-88 y), 43.6% female) undergoing colonoscopy between May 2008 and June 2009.

INTERVENTION

Subjects were advised to consume a low-residue diet for 2 days before the procedure, and they recorded food intake by use of diet diaries.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The quality of bowel cleansing was evaluated using the Ottawa bowel preparation scale. Patient variables and details of each procedure were recorded, and factors that determined the quality of colon cleansing were determined.

LIMITATIONS

Categories of foods consumed were recorded, but not the amount eaten, and diet diaries were completed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Data from 789 patients were analyzed. Only 44.2% of patients adhered to a low-residue diet, and 39.3% of patients were inadequately prepared. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, age (P = .007), body mass index (P = .01), abdominal girth (P = .041), bowel habit tending to constipation (P = .015), and high-residue diet (P < .0001) were independent predictors of inadequate bowel preparation. There was a linear relationship between dietary residue score and bowel cleanliness score (r = -0.475; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

A low-residue diet for 2 days of before colonoscopy improves bowel cleansing, but compliance with this advice is poor. The importance of a low-residue diet should be emphasized to patients undergoing preparation for colonoscopy.