Discontinuation of mechanical bowel preparation in advanced ovarian cancer surgery: an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) initiative

Objective To investigate the impact of discontinuation of mechanical bowel preparation in advanced ovarian cancer surgery within the context of the ERAS program. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients with advanced ovarian cancer who underwent cytoreductive surgery with...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Clinical & translational oncology 2023-01, Vol.25 (1), p.236-242
Main Authors: Sánchez-Iglesias, José Luis, Gómez-Hidalgo, Natalia R., Bebia, Vicente, Ramirez, José Manuel, Pérez-Benavente, Asunción, Nelson, Gregg, Gil-Moreno, Antonio
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Elective Surgical Procedures
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery
Female
Humans
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Oncology
Ovarian Neoplasms - surgery
Preoperative Care - methods
Research Article
Retrospective Studies
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:Objective To investigate the impact of discontinuation of mechanical bowel preparation in advanced ovarian cancer surgery within the context of the ERAS program. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients with advanced ovarian cancer who underwent cytoreductive surgery with simultaneous colon and/or rectal resection from January 2012 to November 2020. Patients were divided into two groups based on whether preoperative mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) was given (pre-ERAS) or not (post-ERAS). Patient characteristics, including duration of antibiotic treatment, surgical complexity, and incidence of surgical and nonsurgical complications, were compared. Results During the study period, 114 patients who underwent colon and/or rectal resection were examined, of whom 39 received MBP and 75 did not receive MBP (NMBP). On comparison between the two groups, no significant differences were noted in the assessed patient characteristics, including mean age, FIGO stage, ASA class, BMI, or residual tumor. One patient (2.6%) in the MBP group, and 4 patients (5.3%) in the NMBP group experienced an anastomotic leakage ( p  = 0.11). No significant differences were found with respect to surgical site infection. ( p  = 0.5). Conclusion MBP was not associated with any specific benefit for advanced ovarian cancer surgery. Gynecologic oncologists who use MBP should consider discontinuing this practice.
ISSN:1699-3055
1699-3055
DOI:10.1007/s12094-022-02934-4