Preoperative mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation to reduce infectious complications of colorectal surgery – the need for updated guidelines

Increasing evidence indicates that combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation reduces the infectious complications of colorectal surgery. Anecdotal evidence suggests the combination is rarely used in the UK and Europe. To establish colorectal surgeons' current use and awareness o...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Journal of hospital infection 2019-03, Vol.101 (3), p.295-299
Main Authors: Battersby, C.L.F., Battersby, N.J., Slade, D.A.J., Soop, M., Walsh, C.J.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Bowel preparation
Complications
Surgical site infection
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Increasing evidence indicates that combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation reduces the infectious complications of colorectal surgery. Anecdotal evidence suggests the combination is rarely used in the UK and Europe. To establish colorectal surgeons' current use and awareness of the benefits of such bowel preparation, and to identify decision-making influences surrounding preoperative bowel preparation. An electronic survey was emailed to all members of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, and promoted via Twitter. A total of 495 respondents completed the survey: 413 (83.2%) UK, 39 (7.9%) other European, 43 (8.7%) non-European. Respondents used oral antibiotics for 12–20% of cases. Mechanical bowel preparation (MBP), phosphate enema, and no preparation, respectively, ranged between 9 and 80%. Combined MBP and oral antibiotic bowel preparation ranged between 5.5 and 18.6%. Fifty-three percent (260/495) agreed that combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation reduces surgical site infection; 32% (157/495) agreed that the combination reduces risk of anastomotic leak. Kappa statistics between 0.06 and 0.27 indicate considerable incongruity between surgeons' awareness of the literature, and day-to-day practice. Twenty-four percent (96/495) believed MBP to be incompatible with enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS); 41% (204/495) believed that MBP delays return to normal intestinal function. Few UK and European colorectal surgeons use mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation, despite evidence of its efficacy in reducing infectious complications. The influence of ERAS pathways and UK and European guidelines may explain this. In contradiction to the UK and Europe, North American guidelines recommend incorporating combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation into ERAS programmes. This study suggests that future UK and European guidelines incorporate combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation into the ERAS pathway.
ISSN:0195-6701
1532-2939
DOI:10.1016/j.jhin.2018.12.010