Evidence Hub

Impact of mechanical bowel preparation on the gut microbiome of patients undergoing left-sided colorectal cancer surgery: randomized clinical trial

K. Žukauskaitė, A. Horvath, Ž. Gricius, Mindaugas Kvietkauskas, B. Baušys, A. Dulskas, J. Kuliavas, R. Baušys et al.

British Journal of Surgery, 2024

12 participants · 22 citations

Abstract

Abstract Background Postoperative complications after colorectal cancer surgery have been linked to the gut microbiome. However, the impact of mechanical bowel preparation using oral preparation agents or rectal enema on postoperative infections remains poorly understood. This study aimed to compare the impact of oral preparation and rectal enema on the gut microbiome and postoperative complications. Methods This open-label pilot RCT was conducted at the National Cancer Institute, Vilnius, Lithuania. Patients with left-side colorectal cancer scheduled for elective resection with primary anastomosis were randomized 1 : 1 to preoperative mechanical bowel preparation with either oral preparation or rectal enema. Stool samples were collected before surgery, and on postoperative day 6 and 30 for 16S rRNA gene sequencing analysis. The primary outcome was difference in β-diversity between groups on postoperative day 6. Results Forty participants were randomized to oral preparation (20) or rectal enema (20). The two groups had similar changes in microbiome composition, and there was no difference in β-diversity on postoperative day 6. Postoperative infections occurred in 12 patients (32%), without differences between the study groups. Patients with infections had an increased abundance of bacteria from the Actinomycetaceae family, Actinomyces genus, Sutterella uncultured species, and Enterococcus faecalis species. Conclusion Mechanical bowel preparation with oral preparation or…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 12 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free