择期胃切除术常规鼻胃减压必要性的汇总分析

Ping-shan Yang, Xiu-Feng Lin, Chen Xie, Fan Luo, Hai Liang, Wei Li
{"title":"择期胃切除术常规鼻胃减压必要性的汇总分析","authors":"Ping-shan Yang, Xiu-Feng Lin, Chen Xie, Fan Luo, Hai Liang, Wei Li","doi":"10.5812/ACR.88990","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Nasogastric decompression is routinely used for intestinal drainage or decompression after gastrectomy. However, nowadays its efficacy is under debate. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy and necessity of nasogastric decompression in radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Methods: Two PubMed and EMBASE electronic databases were retrieved by November 2018. A prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) and comparison of nasogastric decompression with and without nasogastric decompression after gastrectomy are required for eligible studies. Results: A total of 1,885 cases were included in 13 randomized controlled studies. There were 941 cases in nasogastric decompression group and 944 cases in non-nasogastric decompression group after gastrectomy. The patients in non-nasogastric decompression group had significantly shorter time of bowel sound return (WMD = -0.20, 95% CIs = -0.38 0.02, P = 0.03), shorter time of first oral intake (WMD = -0.58, 95% CIs = -0.92 0.24, P = 0.0007), faster tolerance to semi-solid diet (WMD = -0.65, 95% CIs = -0.96 0.34, P < 0.0001), and shorter time of postoperative hospital stay (WMD = -0.99, 95% CIs = -1.70 0.27, P = 0.007). No statistically significant differences were observed in the first time to passage of flatus, vomiting, mortality rates, total complications, gastrointestinal complications, wound complications, respiratory complications, anastomosis or duodenal stump fistula, and general complications. Conclusions: The routine nasogastric decompression was not recommended for patients after elective gastrectomy.","PeriodicalId":8370,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Colorectal Research","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pooled Analysis of the Routine Nasogastric Decompression Necessity for Elective Gastrectomy\",\"authors\":\"Ping-shan Yang, Xiu-Feng Lin, Chen Xie, Fan Luo, Hai Liang, Wei Li\",\"doi\":\"10.5812/ACR.88990\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Nasogastric decompression is routinely used for intestinal drainage or decompression after gastrectomy. However, nowadays its efficacy is under debate. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy and necessity of nasogastric decompression in radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Methods: Two PubMed and EMBASE electronic databases were retrieved by November 2018. A prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) and comparison of nasogastric decompression with and without nasogastric decompression after gastrectomy are required for eligible studies. Results: A total of 1,885 cases were included in 13 randomized controlled studies. There were 941 cases in nasogastric decompression group and 944 cases in non-nasogastric decompression group after gastrectomy. The patients in non-nasogastric decompression group had significantly shorter time of bowel sound return (WMD = -0.20, 95% CIs = -0.38 0.02, P = 0.03), shorter time of first oral intake (WMD = -0.58, 95% CIs = -0.92 0.24, P = 0.0007), faster tolerance to semi-solid diet (WMD = -0.65, 95% CIs = -0.96 0.34, P < 0.0001), and shorter time of postoperative hospital stay (WMD = -0.99, 95% CIs = -1.70 0.27, P = 0.007). No statistically significant differences were observed in the first time to passage of flatus, vomiting, mortality rates, total complications, gastrointestinal complications, wound complications, respiratory complications, anastomosis or duodenal stump fistula, and general complications. Conclusions: The routine nasogastric decompression was not recommended for patients after elective gastrectomy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":8370,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Colorectal Research\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Colorectal Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5812/ACR.88990\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Colorectal Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5812/ACR.88990","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:胃切除术后常规应用鼻胃减压进行肠引流或减压。然而,如今它的功效却备受争议。目的:探讨鼻胃减压术在胃癌根治术中的疗效和必要性。方法:2018年11月检索PubMed和EMBASE两个电子数据库。符合条件的研究需要前瞻性随机对照试验(RCT)和胃切除术后鼻胃减压与不进行鼻胃减压的比较。结果:13项随机对照研究共纳入1885例。胃切除术后鼻胃减压组941例,非鼻胃减压组944例。非鼻胃减压组患者肠声恢复时间显著缩短(WMD = -0.20, 95% ci = -0.38 0.02, P = 0.03),首次口服时间显著缩短(WMD = -0.58, 95% ci = -0.92 0.24, P = 0.0007),对半固体饮食耐受较快(WMD = -0.65, 95% ci = -0.96 0.34, P < 0.0001),术后住院时间显著缩短(WMD = -0.99, 95% ci = -1.70 0.27, P = 0.007)。两组在首次排气、呕吐、死亡率、总并发症、胃肠道并发症、伤口并发症、呼吸并发症、吻合口或十二指肠残端瘘、一般并发症方面差异无统计学意义。结论:择期胃切除术后不推荐常规鼻胃减压。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Pooled Analysis of the Routine Nasogastric Decompression Necessity for Elective Gastrectomy
Background: Nasogastric decompression is routinely used for intestinal drainage or decompression after gastrectomy. However, nowadays its efficacy is under debate. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy and necessity of nasogastric decompression in radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Methods: Two PubMed and EMBASE electronic databases were retrieved by November 2018. A prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) and comparison of nasogastric decompression with and without nasogastric decompression after gastrectomy are required for eligible studies. Results: A total of 1,885 cases were included in 13 randomized controlled studies. There were 941 cases in nasogastric decompression group and 944 cases in non-nasogastric decompression group after gastrectomy. The patients in non-nasogastric decompression group had significantly shorter time of bowel sound return (WMD = -0.20, 95% CIs = -0.38 0.02, P = 0.03), shorter time of first oral intake (WMD = -0.58, 95% CIs = -0.92 0.24, P = 0.0007), faster tolerance to semi-solid diet (WMD = -0.65, 95% CIs = -0.96 0.34, P < 0.0001), and shorter time of postoperative hospital stay (WMD = -0.99, 95% CIs = -1.70 0.27, P = 0.007). No statistically significant differences were observed in the first time to passage of flatus, vomiting, mortality rates, total complications, gastrointestinal complications, wound complications, respiratory complications, anastomosis or duodenal stump fistula, and general complications. Conclusions: The routine nasogastric decompression was not recommended for patients after elective gastrectomy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Role of endoplasmic reticulum metallo protease 1 on Autophagy Pathway in HCT-116 Colorectal Cancer Cell Line ORAL BACTERIA AND COLORECTAL PATHOLOGY Technique of Ghost (Khatith) Ileostomy-How I Do It? Collagenous Enteritis – An Alternative Cause of Malabsorptive Enteropathy SIMPLE ANAL FISTULA: CLINICAL CRITERIA FOR DIAGNOSIS AND LOCAL ANESTHESIA WITH CONSCIOUS SEDATION FOR SURGERY - AN OBSERVATIONAL STUDY
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1