Dataset Information

Probiotics Reduce Postoperative Infections in Patients Undergoing Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT: Background. We performed this meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy of probiotics on prevention of infection-related complications following colorectal resection. Method. PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science were searched up to January 2016. According to the results, only randomized controlled trials that compared the efficacy of probiotics on patients with colorectal resection were included for meta-analysis. Results. Nine studies including a total of 1146 patients met the criteria (556 received multistrain probiotic bacteria, 590 with non-multistrain probiotic bacteria). The combination of multistrain probiotics was beneficial in the reduction of total infections (OR?=?0.30, 95%CI: 0.15-0.61, p = 0.0009), including surgical site infections (SSI) (OR?=?0.48, 95%CI: 0.25-0.89, p = 0.02) and nonsurgical site infections (NSSI) (OR?=?0.36, 95%CI: 0.23-0.56, p < 0.00001). However, there was no significant reduction in total infections (OR?=?0.74, 95%CI: 0.50-1.09, p = 0.13) or SSI (OR?=?0.77, 95%CI: 0.52-1.12, p = 0.17) with the application of non-multistrains of probiotics. Conclusion. Combinations of multistrain probiotic bacteria showed promise in preventing the incidence of infections following colorectal surgery. However, the efficacy of one or two strains of probiotics remains undetermined.

SUBMITTER: Liu PC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5397731 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Probiotics Reduce Postoperative Infections in Patients Undergoing Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Liu Peng Cheng PC Yan Yu Ke YK Ma Yu Jing YJ Wang Xiang Wen XW Geng Jie J Wang Man Cai MC Wei Feng Xian FX Zhang Ya Wu YW Xu Xiao Dong XD Zhang You Cheng YC

Gastroenterology research and practice 20170406

Background. We performed this meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy of probiotics on prevention of infection-related complications following colorectal resection. Method. PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science were searched up to January 2016. According to the results, only randomized controlled trials that compared the efficacy of probiotics on patients with colorectal resection were included for meta-analysis. Results. Nine studies including a total o ...[more]

PMID: 28484489

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimThe aims of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to assess to what extent probiotics/synbiotics reduce infectious complications after colorectal surgery and whether probiotics or synbiotics should be considered as perioperative measures preventing or reducing infectious complications after CRS and should be included in enhanced recovery programmes (ERP). Secondary aims were to answer practical questions precisely on the best formulation and the type and timing of probiotics or synbiotics in CRS.MethodThis systematic review and quantitative meta-analysis were conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Inclusion criteria were randomised trials comparing perioperative probiotics/synbiotics with a placebo or standard care in elective colorectal surgery. Exclusion criteria were non-randomised trials. Overall infectious complications and surgical site infections (SSIs including both deep abdominal infections and wound (skin or under the skin) infections) were the primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes were pulmonary and urinary infections, wound infections, and anastomotic leaks. The databases consulted were Medline, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, and Clinical Trials Register. Risk of bias was assessed according to the GRADE approach. The analysis calculated the random effects estimates risk ratio (RR) for each outcome.Results21 trials were included; 15 evaluated probiotics, and 6 evaluated synbiotics. There were significantly fewer infectious complications (risk ratio (RR) 0.59 [0.47-0.75], I2 = 15%) and fewer SSI (RR 0.70 [0.52-0.95], I2 = 0%) in the probiotic or synbiotic group. There were also significantly fewer pulmonary infections (RR 0.35 [0.20-0.63]) and urinary infections RR 0.41 [0.19-0.87]) as opposed to anastomotic leaks (RR 0.83 [0.47-1.48]) and wound infections (RR 0.74 [0.53-1.03]). Sensitivity analyses showed no significant difference between probiotics and synbiotics in reducing postoperative infections (RR 0.55 [0.42-0.73] versus RR 0.69 [0.42-1.13], p = 0.46).ConclusionsBased on the finding of this study, probiotics/synbiotics reduce infectious complications after colorectal surgery. The effect size was more pronounced for pulmonary and urinary infections. From a practical aspect, some of the questions related to formulations and duration of probiotics or synbiotics need to be answered before including them definitively in enhanced recovery after colorectal surgery programmes.

Project description:ImportanceSurgical site infections remain one of the most frequent complications following abdominal surgery and cause substantial costs, morbidity and mortality.ObjectiveTo assess the effectiveness of wound edge protectors in open abdominal surgery in reducing surgical site infections.Evidence reviewA systematic literature search was conducted according to a prespecified review protocol in a variety of data-bases combined with hand-searches for randomized controlled trials on wound edge protectors in patients undergoing laparotomy. A qualitative and quantitative analysis of included trials was conducted.FindingsWe identified 16 randomized controlled trials including 3695 patients investigating wound edge protectors published between 1972 and 2014. Critical appraisal uncovered a number of methodological flaws, predominantly in the older trials. Wound edge protectors significantly reduced the rate of surgical site infections (risk ratio 0.65; 95%CI, 0.51-0.83; p = 0.0007; I2 = 52%). The results were robust in a number of sensitivity analyses. A similar effect size was found in the subgroup of patients undergoing colorectal surgery (risk ratio 0.65; 95%CI, 0.44-0.97; p = 0.04; I2 = 56%). Of the two common types of wound protectors double ring devices were found to exhibit a greater protective effect (risk ratio 0.29; 95%CI, 0.15-0.55) than single-ring devices (risk ratio 0.71; 95%CI, 0.54-0.92), but this might largely be due to the lower quality of available data for double-ring devices. Exploratory subgroup analyses for the degree of contamination showed a larger protective effect in contaminated cases (0.44; 95%CI, 0.28-0.67; p = 0.0002, I2 = 23%) than in clean-contaminated surgeries (0.72, 95%CI, 0.57-0.91; p = 0.005; I2 = 46%) and a strong effect on the reduction of superficial surgical site infections (risk ratio 0.45; 95%CI, 0.24-0.82; p = 0.001; I2 = 72%).Conclusions and relevanceWound edge protectors significantly reduce the rate of surgical site infections in open abdominal surgery. Further trials are needed to explore their effectiveness in different risk constellations.

Project description:BackgroundUlinastatin is a type of glycoprotein and a nonspecific wide-spectrum protease inhibitor like antifibrinolytic agent aprotinin. Whether Ulinastatin has similar beneficial effects on blood conservation in cardiac surgical patients as aprotinin remains undetermined. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the effects of Ulinastatin on perioperative bleeding and transfusion in patients who underwent cardiac surgery.MethodsElectronic databases were searched to identify all clinical trials comparing Ulinastatin with placebo/blank on postoperative bleeding and transfusion in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Primary outcomes included perioperative blood loss, blood transfusion, postoperative re-exploration for bleeding. Secondary outcomes include perioperative hemoglobin level, platelet counts and functions, coagulation tests, inflammatory cytokines level, and so on. For continuous variables, treatment effects were calculated as weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidential interval (CI). For dichotomous data, treatment effects were calculated as odds ratio and 95% CI. Statistical significance was defined as P < .05.ResultsOur search yielded 21 studies including 1310 patients, and 617 patients were allocated into Ulinastatin group and 693 into Control (placebo/blank) group. There was no significant difference in intraoperative bleeding volume, postoperative re-exploration for bleeding incidence, intraoperative red blood cell transfusion units, postoperative fresh frozen plasma transfusion volumes and platelet concentrates transfusion units between the 2 groups (all P > .05). Ulinastatin reduces postoperative bleeding (WMD = -0.73, 95% CI: -1.17 to -0.28, P = .001) and red blood cell (RBC) transfusion (WMD = -0.70, 95% CI: -1.26 to -0.14, P = .01), inhibits hyperfibrinolysis as manifested by lower level of postoperative D-dimer (WMD = -0.87, 95% CI: -1.34 to -0.39, P = .0003).ConclusionThis meta-analysis has found some evidence showing that Ulinastatin reduces postoperative bleeding and RBC transfusion in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. However, these findings should be interpreted rigorously. Further well-conducted trials are required to assess the blood-saving effects and mechanisms of Ulinastatin.

Dataset Information

Probiotics Reduce Postoperative Infections in Patients Undergoing Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Publications

Probiotics Reduce Postoperative Infections in Patients Undergoing Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure