Mechanical Preparation of the Colon before Colorectal Surgery - Is It Still Actual?

Mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) has long been a subject of debate in colorectal surgery. While it was historically regarded as a standard preoperative practice, recent evidence has questioned its necessity and effectiveness, especially when used in isolation. This review explores the evolving rol...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inMædica Vol. 19; no. 4; pp. 769 - 774
Main Authors Dragomir, Maria-Alexandra, Constantinescu, Alexandru, Andronic, Octavian
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Tarus Media 01.12.2024
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN1841-9038
2069-6116
DOI10.26574/maedica.2024.19.4.7692024;

Cover

Abstract Mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) has long been a subject of debate in colorectal surgery. While it was historically regarded as a standard preoperative practice, recent evidence has questioned its necessity and effectiveness, especially when used in isolation. This review explores the evolving role of MBP, its combination with oral antibiotics (OA), and its impact on postoperative outcomes, such as surgical site infections (SSI) and anastomotic leakage (AL). Studies suggest that MBP combined with OA offers superior benefits compared to MBP alone, particularly in left-sided colorectal and rectal surgeries. However, the role of MBP remains contentious in right-sided resections, with conflicting evidence regarding its effectiveness. Furthermore, concerns about patient discomfort, dehydration, and electrolyte imbalances have raised doubts about its routine use. Our comprehensive analysis, based on 11 years of published research, highlights that the decision to employ MBP should be individualized, taking into account the type of surgical intervention, patient comorbidities and overall health status. While MBP+OA shows promise in reducing SSI rates, further research is needed to evaluate its broader clinical implications and to explore alternatives, including newer antibiotics, to minimize reliance on MBP.Mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) has long been a subject of debate in colorectal surgery. While it was historically regarded as a standard preoperative practice, recent evidence has questioned its necessity and effectiveness, especially when used in isolation. This review explores the evolving role of MBP, its combination with oral antibiotics (OA), and its impact on postoperative outcomes, such as surgical site infections (SSI) and anastomotic leakage (AL). Studies suggest that MBP combined with OA offers superior benefits compared to MBP alone, particularly in left-sided colorectal and rectal surgeries. However, the role of MBP remains contentious in right-sided resections, with conflicting evidence regarding its effectiveness. Furthermore, concerns about patient discomfort, dehydration, and electrolyte imbalances have raised doubts about its routine use. Our comprehensive analysis, based on 11 years of published research, highlights that the decision to employ MBP should be individualized, taking into account the type of surgical intervention, patient comorbidities and overall health status. While MBP+OA shows promise in reducing SSI rates, further research is needed to evaluate its broader clinical implications and to explore alternatives, including newer antibiotics, to minimize reliance on MBP.
AbstractList Mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) has long been a subject of debate in colorectal surgery. While it was historically regarded as a standard preoperative practice, recent evidence has questioned its necessity and effectiveness, especially when used in isolation. This review explores the evolving role of MBP, its combination with oral antibiotics (OA), and its impact on postoperative outcomes, such as surgical site infections (SSI) and anastomotic leakage (AL). Studies suggest that MBP combined with OA offers superior benefits compared to MBP alone, particularly in left-sided colorectal and rectal surgeries. However, the role of MBP remains contentious in right-sided resections, with conflicting evidence regarding its effectiveness. Furthermore, concerns about patient discomfort, dehydration, and electrolyte imbalances have raised doubts about its routine use. Our comprehensive analysis, based on 11 years of published research, highlights that the decision to employ MBP should be individualized, taking into account the type of surgical intervention, patient comorbidities and overall health status. While MBP+OA shows promise in reducing SSI rates, further research is needed to evaluate its broader clinical implications and to explore alternatives, including newer antibiotics, to minimize reliance on MBP.Mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) has long been a subject of debate in colorectal surgery. While it was historically regarded as a standard preoperative practice, recent evidence has questioned its necessity and effectiveness, especially when used in isolation. This review explores the evolving role of MBP, its combination with oral antibiotics (OA), and its impact on postoperative outcomes, such as surgical site infections (SSI) and anastomotic leakage (AL). Studies suggest that MBP combined with OA offers superior benefits compared to MBP alone, particularly in left-sided colorectal and rectal surgeries. However, the role of MBP remains contentious in right-sided resections, with conflicting evidence regarding its effectiveness. Furthermore, concerns about patient discomfort, dehydration, and electrolyte imbalances have raised doubts about its routine use. Our comprehensive analysis, based on 11 years of published research, highlights that the decision to employ MBP should be individualized, taking into account the type of surgical intervention, patient comorbidities and overall health status. While MBP+OA shows promise in reducing SSI rates, further research is needed to evaluate its broader clinical implications and to explore alternatives, including newer antibiotics, to minimize reliance on MBP.
Mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) has long been a subject of debate in colorectal surgery. While it was historically regarded as a standard preoperative practice, recent evidence has questioned its necessity and effectiveness, especially when used in isolation. This review explores the evolving role of MBP, its combination with oral antibiotics (OA), and its impact on postoperative outcomes, such as surgical site infections (SSI) and anastomotic leakage (AL). Studies suggest that MBP combined with OA offers superior benefits compared to MBP alone, particularly in left-sided colorectal and rectal surgeries. However, the role of MBP remains contentious in right-sided resections, with conflicting evidence regarding its effectiveness. Furthermore, concerns about patient discomfort, dehydration, and electrolyte imbalances have raised doubts about its routine use. Our comprehensive analysis, based on 11 years of published research, highlights that the decision to employ MBP should be individualized, taking into account the type of surgical intervention, patient comorbidities and overall health status. While MBP+OA shows promise in reducing SSI rates, further research is needed to evaluate its broader clinical implications and to explore alternatives, including newer antibiotics, to minimize reliance on MBP.
Author Constantinescu, Alexandru
Dragomir, Maria-Alexandra
Andronic, Octavian
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Maria-Alexandra
  surname: Dragomir
  fullname: Dragomir, Maria-Alexandra
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Alexandru
  surname: Constantinescu
  fullname: Constantinescu, Alexandru
– sequence: 3
  givenname: Octavian
  surname: Andronic
  fullname: Andronic, Octavian
BookMark eNpVjF1LwzAUhoNMcM79h4A33rQmTZqkeDHG8GMwUdjuy2l6ulWypqatsH9vZbvxwMvh4X15bsmk8Q0Scs9ZnKhUy8cjYFlbiBOWyJhnsYy1yv7g6YpME6aySHGuJmTKjeRRxoS5IfOu-2LjpYnRik3J9h3tAZpR4-hnwBYC9LVvqK9of0C68m6EAisfzhDQ9uN0O4Q9hhON6Lqj655u-9o5urT9AG5xR64rcB3OL39Gdi_Pu9VbtPl4Xa-Wm6g1mYrGcMGQidRawxGxKMBUJSuEBV4WMgVTcqlTYzQTWGhgSiaSCZtmKoUMxYwsztp2KI5YWmz6AC5vQ32EcMo91Pn_pqkP-d7_5JwbIY1Qo-HhYgj-e8Cuz491Z9E5aNAPXS64MlpLbRLxC2vzb-U
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright 2005
Copyright_xml – notice: 2005
DBID 7X8
5PM
DOI 10.26574/maedica.2024.19.4.7692024;
DatabaseName MEDLINE - Academic
PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)
DatabaseTitle MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList MEDLINE - Academic

DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
EISSN 2069-6116
EndPage 774
ExternalDocumentID PMC11834836
Genre Commentary
Editorial
GroupedDBID 53G
7X8
ABDBF
ACUHS
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
EN8
EOJEC
ESX
HYE
MK0
OBODZ
OK1
RPM
TUS
~8M
5PM
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-p896-896130e035cc81eeebba8fd0b3ca1db45a8d147588703eb7a0642403c5965a9e3
ISSN 1841-9038
IngestDate Thu Aug 21 18:28:41 EDT 2025
Fri Jul 11 05:52:36 EDT 2025
IsPeerReviewed false
IsScholarly false
Issue 4
Language English
LinkModel OpenURL
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-p896-896130e035cc81eeebba8fd0b3ca1db45a8d147588703eb7a0642403c5965a9e3
Notes SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
content type line 23
ObjectType-Editorial-2
ObjectType-Commentary-1
PQID 3168774782
PQPubID 23479
PageCount 6
ParticipantIDs pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_11834836
proquest_miscellaneous_3168774782
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 20241201
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2024-12-01
PublicationDate_xml – month: 12
  year: 2024
  text: 20241201
  day: 01
PublicationDecade 2020
PublicationTitle Mædica
PublicationYear 2024
Publisher Tarus Media
Publisher_xml – name: Tarus Media
SSID ssj0000528760
Score 1.8941498
Snippet Mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) has long been a subject of debate in colorectal surgery. While it was historically regarded as a standard preoperative...
SourceID pubmedcentral
proquest
SourceType Open Access Repository
Aggregation Database
StartPage 769
SubjectTerms Review
Title Mechanical Preparation of the Colon before Colorectal Surgery - Is It Still Actual?
URI https://www.proquest.com/docview/3168774782
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC11834836
Volume 19
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
journalDatabaseRights – providerCode: PRVEBS
  databaseName: EBSCOhost Academic Search Ultimate
  customDbUrl: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?authtype=ip,shib&custid=s3936755&profile=ehost&defaultdb=asn
  eissn: 2069-6116
  dateEnd: 99991231
  omitProxy: true
  ssIdentifier: ssj0000528760
  issn: 1841-9038
  databaseCode: ABDBF
  dateStart: 20070301
  isFulltext: true
  titleUrlDefault: https://search.ebscohost.com/direct.asp?db=asn
  providerName: EBSCOhost
– providerCode: PRVAQN
  databaseName: PubMed Central (Free e-resource, activated by CARLI)
  customDbUrl:
  eissn: 2069-6116
  dateEnd: 99991231
  omitProxy: true
  ssIdentifier: ssj0000528760
  issn: 1841-9038
  databaseCode: RPM
  dateStart: 20100101
  isFulltext: true
  titleUrlDefault: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/
  providerName: National Library of Medicine
link http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV3fb9MwELagkxAviAkQYzAZwZ4mhyR2Ekc8oI2uWtG6IZFJfYv8a6zSlpYs5YG_nrOdNukE0uChUR2rqev7errz3XeH0PtQuzpkNnuKJ-CgMEakyhShTNBU8dRwRxSenKUnF-zLNJl2SeyOXdLIQP36I6_kf6QK90CuliX7D5JdPxRuwHuQL1xBwnC9l4wnxvJ23TZ_rY2v4u3tv8a1o7uGgTRglvqBVW62-IdnQh-Qg7E9qgd7c3YNcnJMkjt5fhMXR091L6FnWIvv85tZ3RJ9ZoK0HJm6y_nxNmdjM-rVskejqZfdqYN2RXnt5Dms6ucKpe0BRMx6yRxeZ3Jmszx8kZa1Us174GE9DZn5zix3NXecJhmD_b4RLj4V2C8KojxgAXzADvZpF9JZh-nPzsvRxelpWRxPC_inLH4Q207Mht336dDL-yHaikHhhwO0dXg0PBqtD-DCBJxFzyJf_YBH6N1qKR_-upCPG77IZiZtzzQpnqInrU-BDz1AttEDUz1D3zpw4B448PwSAziwAwf24MAdOHALDkzw-BaPG-zAgT04Pj1Hxei4-HxC2g4aZMHzlMALTBQT0kQpHhljpBT8UoeSKhFpyRLBdcTAYwSlTY3MhPVGWUhVkqeJyA19gQbVvDIvETYxlTIWUaypYVSF0sC0BuufxlrkEd9Bb1ebUoKCslEnUZn58ra0ndEy26Uh3kF8Y7fKhS-oUtoS55sz1ezKlToH95cyTtNX93j8LnrcwfM1GjT10rwBi7GRe63sfwMw7W1Z
linkProvider EBSCOhost
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Mechanical+Preparation+of+the+Colon+before+Colorectal+Surgery+-+Is+It+Still+Actual%3F&rft.jtitle=M%C3%A6dica&rft.au=Dragomir%2C+Maria-Alexandra&rft.au=Constantinescu%2C+Alexandru&rft.au=Andronic%2C+Octavian&rft.date=2024-12-01&rft.issn=1841-9038&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=769&rft_id=info:doi/10.26574%2Fmaedica.2024.19.4.7692024%3B&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1841-9038&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1841-9038&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1841-9038&client=summon