EAES, SAGES, and ESCP rapid guideline: bowel preparation for minimally invasive colorectal resection.
Bowel preparation
Colorectal surgery
Guidelines
Laparoscopic surgery
Minimally invasive surgery
Journal
Surgical endoscopy
ISSN: 1432-2218
Titre abrégé: Surg Endosc
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8806653
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2023
Dec 2023
Historique:
received:
21
08
2023
accepted:
17
09
2023
pubmed:
31
10
2023
medline:
31
10
2023
entrez:
31
10
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Variation exists in practice pertaining to bowel preparation before minimally invasive colorectal surgery. A survey of EAES members prioritized this topic to be addressed by a clinical practice guideline. The aim of the study was to develop evidence-informed clinical practice recommendations on the use of bowel preparation before minimally invasive colorectal surgery, through evidence synthesis and a structured evidence-to-decision framework by an interdisciplinary panel of stakeholders. This is a collaborative project of EAES, SAGES, and ESCP. We updated a previous systematic review and performed a network meta-analysis of interventions. We appraised the certainty of the evidence for each comparison, using the GRADE and CINeMA methods. A panel of general and colorectal surgeons, infectious diseases specialists, an anesthetist, and a patient representative discussed the evidence in the context of benefits and harms, the certainty of the evidence, acceptability, feasibility, equity, cost, and use of resources, moderated by a GIN-certified master guideline developer and chair. We developed the recommendations in a consensus meeting, followed by a modified Delphi survey. The panel suggests either oral antibiotics alone prior to minimally invasive right colon resection or mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) plus oral antibiotics; MBP plus oral antibiotics prior to minimally invasive left colon and sigmoid resection, and prior to minimally invasive right colon resection when there is an intention to perform intracorporeal anastomosis; and MBP plus oral antibiotics plus enema prior to minimally invasive rectal surgery (conditional recommendations); and recommends MBP plus oral antibiotics prior to minimally invasive colorectal surgery, when there is an intention to localize the lesion intraoperatively (strong recommendation). The full guideline with user-friendly decision aids is available in https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/LwvKej . This guideline provides recommendations on bowel preparation prior to minimally invasive colorectal surgery for different procedures, using highest methodological standards, through a structured framework informed by key stakeholders. Guideline registration number PREPARE-2023CN045.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Variation exists in practice pertaining to bowel preparation before minimally invasive colorectal surgery. A survey of EAES members prioritized this topic to be addressed by a clinical practice guideline.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
The aim of the study was to develop evidence-informed clinical practice recommendations on the use of bowel preparation before minimally invasive colorectal surgery, through evidence synthesis and a structured evidence-to-decision framework by an interdisciplinary panel of stakeholders.
METHODS
METHODS
This is a collaborative project of EAES, SAGES, and ESCP. We updated a previous systematic review and performed a network meta-analysis of interventions. We appraised the certainty of the evidence for each comparison, using the GRADE and CINeMA methods. A panel of general and colorectal surgeons, infectious diseases specialists, an anesthetist, and a patient representative discussed the evidence in the context of benefits and harms, the certainty of the evidence, acceptability, feasibility, equity, cost, and use of resources, moderated by a GIN-certified master guideline developer and chair. We developed the recommendations in a consensus meeting, followed by a modified Delphi survey.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The panel suggests either oral antibiotics alone prior to minimally invasive right colon resection or mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) plus oral antibiotics; MBP plus oral antibiotics prior to minimally invasive left colon and sigmoid resection, and prior to minimally invasive right colon resection when there is an intention to perform intracorporeal anastomosis; and MBP plus oral antibiotics plus enema prior to minimally invasive rectal surgery (conditional recommendations); and recommends MBP plus oral antibiotics prior to minimally invasive colorectal surgery, when there is an intention to localize the lesion intraoperatively (strong recommendation). The full guideline with user-friendly decision aids is available in https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/LwvKej .
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
This guideline provides recommendations on bowel preparation prior to minimally invasive colorectal surgery for different procedures, using highest methodological standards, through a structured framework informed by key stakeholders. Guideline registration number PREPARE-2023CN045.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37903883
doi: 10.1007/s00464-023-10477-0
pii: 10.1007/s00464-023-10477-0
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
9001-9012Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Zmora O, Pikarsky AJ, Wexner SD (2001) Bowel preparation for colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 44(10):1537–1549. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02234614
doi: 10.1007/BF02234614
pubmed: 11598488
Klinger AL, Green H, Monlezun DJ, Beck D, Kann B, Vargas HD, Whitlow C, Margolin D (2019) The role of bowel preparation in colorectal surgery: results of the 2012–2015 ACS-NSQIP data. Ann Surg 269(4):671–677. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002568
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002568
pubmed: 29064902
NICE (2019) 2019 exceptional surveillance of surgical site infections: prevention and treatment (NICE guideline NG125). https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng125/resources/2019-exceptional-surveillance-of-surgical-site-infections-prevention-and-treatment-nice-guideline-ng125-pdf-8718507017413 . Accessed 1 Jan 2022
World Health Organization (2018) Global guidelines for the prevention of surgical site infection, 2nd edn. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/277399 . Accessed 1 Jan 2022
Antoniou SA, Mavridis D, Tsokani S, Morales-Conde S, EAES Guidelines Subcommittee (2023) Network meta-analysis as a tool in clinical practice guidelines. Surg Endosc 37(1):1–4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09772-z
doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09772-z
pubmed: 36456712
European Association for Endoscopic Surgery and other Interventional Techniques (2022) Outcome of the EAES poll to prioritize topics for future guidelines. https://eaes.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/2022-05-09-poll.pdf . Accessed 13 Jul 2022
Antoniou SA, Tsokani S, Mavridis D, López-Cano M, Antoniou GA, Stefanidis D, Francis NK, Smart N, Muysoms FE, Morales-Conde S, Bonjer HJ, Brouwers MC (2019) Guideline assessment project: filling the GAP in surgical guidelines: quality improvement initiative by an International Working Group. Ann Surg 269(4):642–651. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000003036
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003036
pubmed: 30188402
Schünemann H, Brożek J, Guyatt G, Oxman A (2013) GRADE handbook for grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. https://gdt.gradepro.org/app/handbook/handbook.html . Accessed 1 Jan 2022
AGREE-S (2021) AGREE II extension for guidelines on surgical interventions. https://agree-s.org/ . Accessed 1 Jan 2022
Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Standards for Developing Trustworthy (2011) Clinical practice guidelines: clinical practice guidelines we can trust
Qaseem A, Forland F, Macbeth F, Ollenschläger G, Phillips S, van der Wees P, Board of Trustees of the Guidelines International Network (2012) Guidelines international network: toward international standards for clinical practice guidelines. Ann Intern Med 156(7):525–531. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-156-7-201204030-00009
doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-156-7-201204030-00009
pubmed: 22473437
Garritty C, Gartlehner G, Nussbaumer-Streit B, King VJ, Hamel C, Kamel C, Affengruber L, Stevens A (2021) Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group offers evidence-informed guidance to conduct rapid reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 130:13–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.10.007
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.10.007
pubmed: 33068715
Antoniou SA (2023) Online appendix of EAES, SAGES and ESCP rapid guideline: bowel preparation for minimally invasive colorectal resection. http://bit.ly/3XzgCkq . Accessed 3 Jul 2023
Schünemann HJ, Al-Ansary LA, Forland F, Kersten S, Komulainen J, Kopp IB, Macbeth F, Phillips SM, Robbins C, van der Wees P, Qaseem A, Board of Trustees of the Guidelines International Network (2015) Guidelines international network: principles for disclosure of interests and management of conflicts in guidelines. Ann Intern Med 163(7):548–553. https://doi.org/10.7326/M14-1885
doi: 10.7326/M14-1885
pubmed: 26436619
Ortenzi M, Koutsiouroumpa R, Mavridis D, Antoniou SA (2023) Guideline protocol: EAES, SAGES and ESCP rapid guideline: bowel preparation for minimally invasive colorectal resection. https://eaes.eu/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Protocol-draft-PREP.pdf . Accessed 3 Jul 2023
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Atkins D, Brozek J, Vist G, Alderson P, Glasziou P, Falck-Ytter Y, Schünemann HJ (2011) GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 64(4):395–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.09.012
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.09.012
pubmed: 21194891
Hultcrantz M, Rind D, Akl EA, Treweek S, Mustafa RA, Iorio A, Alper BS, Meerpohl JJ, Murad MH, Ansari MT, Katikireddi SV, Östlund P, Tranæus S, Christensen R, Gartlehner G, Brozek J, Izcovich A, Schünemann H, Guyatt G (2017) The GRADE Working Group clarifies the construct of certainty of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 87:4–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.05.006
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.05.006
pubmed: 28529184
pmcid: 6542664
Woodfield JC, Clifford K, Schmidt B, Turner GA, Amer MA, McCall JL (2022) Strategies for antibiotic administration for bowel preparation among patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery: a network meta-analysis. JAMA Surg 157(1):34–41. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2021.5251.PMID:34668964;PMCID:PMC8529526
doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2021.5251.PMID:34668964;PMCID:PMC8529526
pubmed: 34668964
Woodfield J, Schmidt B, Amer M, McCall J, Clifford K (2023) Network meta-analysis of bowel preparation in elective colorectal surgery. PROSPERO 2017 CRD42017059746. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42017059746 . Accessed 30 Jan 2023
Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A (2016) Rayyan-a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev 5(1):210. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4
doi: 10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4
pubmed: 27919275
pmcid: 5139140
Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Blencowe NS, Boutron I, Cates CJ, Cheng HY, Corbett MS, Eldridge SM, Emberson JR, Hernán MA, Hopewell S, Hróbjartsson A, Junqueira DR, Jüni P, Kirkham JJ, Lasserson T, Li T, McAleenan A, Reeves BC, Shepperd S, Shrier I, Stewart LA, Tilling K, White IR, Whiting PF, Higgins JPT (2019) RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 28(366):l4898. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l4898
doi: 10.1136/bmj.l4898
McGuinness LA, Higgins JPT (2021) Risk-of-bias VISualization (robvis): An R package and Shiny web app for visualizing risk-of-bias assessments. Res Synth Methods 12(1):55–61. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1411
doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1411
pubmed: 32336025
Salanti G (2012) Indirect and mixed-treatment comparison, network, or multiple-treatments meta-analysis: many names, many benefits, many concerns for the next generation evidence synthesis tool. Res Synth Methods 3(2):80–97
doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1037
pubmed: 26062083
Mavridis D, Giannatsi M, Cipriani A, Salanti G (2015) A primer on network meta-analysis with emphasis on mental health. Evid Based Ment Health 18(2):40–46
doi: 10.1136/eb-2015-102088
pubmed: 25908686
Rücker G (2012) Network meta-analysis, electrical networks and graph theory. Res Synth Methods 3(4):312–324. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1058
doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1058
pubmed: 26053424
R Core Team (2021) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna
Rücker G, Krahn U, König J, Efthimiou O, Davies A, Papakonstantinou T, Schwarzer G (2021) netmeta: network meta-analysis using frequentist methods. R package version 2.0-1. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=netmeta
Rücker G, Schwarzer G (2015) Ranking treatments in frequentist network meta-analysis works without resampling methods. BMC Med Res Methodol 15:58. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-015-0060-8
doi: 10.1186/s12874-015-0060-8
pubmed: 26227148
pmcid: 4521472
Dias S, Welton NJ, Caldwell DM, Ades AE (2010) Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis. Stat Med 29(7–8):932–944. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.3767
doi: 10.1002/sim.3767
pubmed: 20213715
Chaimani A, Higgins JP, Mavridis D, Spyridonos P, Salanti G (2013) Graphical tools for network meta-analysis in STATA. PLoS ONE 8(10):e76654. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0076654
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0076654
pubmed: 24098547
pmcid: 3789683
Schünemann H, Brożek J, Guyatt G, Oxman A (2022) GRADE handbook: 5 quality of evidence. https://gdt.gradepro.org/app/handbook/handbook.html#h.9rdbelsnu4iy . Accessed 1 Jan 2022
Papakonstantinou T, Nikolakopoulou A, Higgins JPT, Egger M, Salanti G (2020) CINeMA: software for semiautomated assessment of the confidence in the results of network meta-analysis. Campbell Syst Rev 16(1):1–15
Nikolakopoulou A, Higgins JPT, Papakonstantinou T, Chaimani A, Del Giovane C, Egger M, Salanti G (2020) CINeMA: an approach for assessing confidence in the results of a network meta-analysis. PLoS Med 17(4):e1003082. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003082
doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003082
pubmed: 32243458
pmcid: 7122720
Profillidis VA, Botzoris G (2019) Executive judgment, Delphi, scenario writing, and survey methods. Elsevier, Amsterdam. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-811513-8.00004-2
doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-811513-8.00004-2
Mulder T, Kluytmans-van den Bergh M, Vlaminckx B, Roos D, de Smet AM, de Vos Tot Nederveen Cappel R, Verheijen P, Brandt A, Smits A, van der Vorm E, Bathoorn E, van Etten B, Veenemans J, Weersink A, Vos M, van ’t Veer N, Nikolakopoulos S, Bonten M, Kluytmans J (2020) Prevention of severe infectious complications after colorectal surgery using oral non-absorbable antimicrobial prophylaxis: results of a multicenter randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 9(1):84. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13756-020-00745-2
doi: 10.1186/s13756-020-00745-2
pubmed: 32539786
pmcid: 7294517
Rybakov E, Nagudov M, Sukhina M, Shelygin Y (2021) Impact of oral antibiotic prophylaxis on surgical site infection after rectal surgery: results of randomized trial. Int J Colorectal Dis 36(2):323–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-020-03746-0
doi: 10.1007/s00384-020-03746-0
pubmed: 32984909
Papp G, Saftics G, Szabó BE, Baracs J, Vereczkei A, Kollár D, Oláh A, Mészáros P, Dubóczki Z, Bursics A (2021) Systemic versus oral and systemic antibiotic prophylaxis (SOAP) study in colorectal surgery: prospective randomized multicentre trial. Br J Surg 108(3):271–276. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znaa131
doi: 10.1093/bjs/znaa131
pubmed: 33793743
Arezzo A, Mistrangelo M, Bonino MA, Salusso P, Forcignanò E, Vettoretto N, Botteri E, Cillara N, Ottonello R, Testa V, De Rosa FG, Corcione S, Passera R, Morino M (2021) Oral neomycin and bacitracin are effective in preventing surgical site infections in elective colorectal surgery: a multicentre, randomized, parallel, single-blinded trial (COLORAL-1). Updates Surg 73(5):1775–1786. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-021-01112-5
doi: 10.1007/s13304-021-01112-5
pubmed: 34148172
pmcid: 8214720
Jung B, Påhlman L, Nyström PO, Nilsson E (2007) Multicentre randomized clinical trial of mechanical bowel preparation in elective colonic resection. Br J Surg 94(6):689–695. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.5816
doi: 10.1002/bjs.5816
pubmed: 17514668
Mai-Phan AT, Nguyen H, Nguyen TT, Nguyen DA, Thai TT (2019) Randomized controlled trial of mechanical bowel preparation for laparoscopy-assisted colectomy. Asian J Endosc Surg 12(4):408–411. https://doi.org/10.1111/ases.12671
doi: 10.1111/ases.12671
pubmed: 30430745
Khangura SD, la Fleur P, Argáez C, Adcock L (2018) Bowel preparation for elective colorectal procedures: a review of clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and guidelines. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, Ottawa
Gu S, Brar M, Schmocker S, Kennedy E (2022) Are colorectal surgery patients willing to accept an increased risk of surgical site infection to avoid mechanical bowel preparation? Implications for future trial design. Colorectal Dis 24(3):322–328. https://doi.org/10.1111/Codi.16000
doi: 10.1111/Codi.16000
pubmed: 34821463
Brecha FS, Ozanne EM, Esplin J, Stoddard GJ, Nirula R, Huang LC, Cohan JN (2021) Patient willingness to accept antibiotic side effects to reduce surgical site infection after colorectal surgery. J Surg Res 261:417–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.Jss.2020.07.083
doi: 10.1016/J.Jss.2020.07.083
pubmed: 32917390
Vadhwana B, Pouzi A, Surjus Kaneta G, Reid V, Claxton D, Pyne L, Chalmers R, Malik A, Bowers D, Groot-Wassink T (2020) Preoperative oral antibiotic bowel preparation in elective resectional colorectal surgery reduces rates of surgical site infections: a single-centre experience with a cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 102(2):133–140. https://doi.org/10.1308/Rcsann.2019.0117
doi: 10.1308/Rcsann.2019.0117
pubmed: 31508999