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。
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.