For elective surgery of colorectal cancer, current evidence supports preoperative mechanical bowel preparation combined with oral antibiotics. Meanwhile, for patients with varied degrees of intestinal stenosis, individualized protocol is required to avoid adverse events. We hereby summarize recent high-quality evidences and updates of guidelines and consensus, and recommend stratified bowel preparation based on the clinical practice of our institute as follows. (1) For patients with unimpaired oral intake, whose tumor can be passed by colonoscopy, mechanical bowel preparation and oral antibiotics are given. (2) For patients without symptoms of bowel obstruction but with impaired oral intake or incomplete colonoscopy due to tumor-related stenosis, small-dosage laxative is given for several days before surgery, and oral antibiotics the day before surgery. (3) For patients with bowel obstruction, mechanical bowel preparation or enema is not indicated. We proposed this evidence-based, individualized protocol for preoperative bowel preparation for the reference of our colleagues, in the hope of improving perioperative outcomes and reducing adverse events.
Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use* ; Colorectal Neoplasms/drug therapy* ; Constriction, Pathologic/etiology* ; Elective Surgical Procedures/adverse effects* ; Humans ; Preoperative Care/methods* ; Surgical Wound Infection/etiology*

The anastomotic complications following radical gastrectomy mainly include anastomotic leakage, anastomotic hemorrhage, and anastomotic stricture. Theanastomotic complications are not rare and remain the most common complications resulting in the perioperativedeath of patients with gastric cancer. Standardized training could let surgeons fully realize that strict selection of operative indications, thorough preoperative assessment and preparation, and refined operation in surgery are the essential measures to prevent the anastomotic complications following radical gastrectomy. In addition, identifying these complications timely and taking effective measures promptly according to the clinical context are the keys to treating these complications, reducing the treatment cycle, and decreasing the mortality.
Anastomosis, Surgical ; adverse effects ; Anastomotic Leak ; prevention & control ; therapy ; Constriction, Pathologic ; prevention & control ; therapy ; Gastrectomy ; adverse effects ; methods ; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage ; prevention & control ; therapy ; Humans ; Postoperative Complications ; diagnosis ; therapy ; Preoperative Care ; methods ; standards ; Risk Assessment ; methods ; standards ; Risk Factors ; Stomach Neoplasms ; complications ; mortality ; surgery

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The aims of this study were to compare the bowel-cleansing efficacy, patient affinity for the preparation solution, and mucosal injury between a split dose of poly-ethylene glycol (SD-PEG) and low-volume PEG plus ascorbic acid (LV-PEG+Asc) in outpatient scheduled colonoscopies. METHODS: Of the 319 patients, 160 were enrolled for SD-PEG, and 159 for LV-PEG+Asc. The bowel-cleansing efficacy was rated according to the Ottawa bowel preparation scale. Patient affinity for the preparation solution was assessed using a questionnaire. All mucosal injuries observed during colonoscopy were biopsied and histopathologically reviewed. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in bowel cleansing between the groups. The LV-PEG+Asc group reported better patient acceptance and preference. There were no significant differences in the incidence or characteristics of the mucosal injuries between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with SD-PEG, LV-PEG+Asc exhibited equivalent bowel-cleansing efficacy and resulted in improved patient acceptance and preference. There was no significant difference in mucosal injury between SD-PEG and LV-PEG+Asc. Thus, the LV-PEG+Asc preparation could be used more effectively and easily for routine colonoscopies without risking significant mucosal injury.
Adult ; Ascorbic Acid/administration & dosage/*adverse effects ; Cathartics/administration & dosage/*adverse effects ; Colonoscopy/methods ; Drug Therapy, Combination ; Female ; Humans ; Intestinal Mucosa/drug effects/*injuries ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Patient Compliance ; Patient Satisfaction ; Polyethylene Glycols/administration & dosage/*adverse effects ; Preoperative Care/*adverse effects/methods ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Vitamins/administration & dosage/adverse effects

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Controversy remains over the optimal approach to preoperative biliary drainage in patients with resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. We compared the clinical outcomes of endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) with those of percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) in patients undergoing preoperative biliary drainage for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. METHODS: A total of 106 consecutive patients who underwent biliary drainage before surgical treatment were divided into two groups: the PTBD group (n=62) and the EBD group (n=44). RESULTS: Successful drainage on the first attempt was achieved in 36 of 62 patients (58.1%) with PTBD, and in 25 of 44 patients (56.8%) with EBD. There were no significant differences in predrainage patient demographics and decompression periods between the two groups. Procedure-related complications, especially cholangitis and pancreatitis, were significantly more frequent in the EBD group than the PTBD group (PTBD vs EBD: 22.6% vs 54.5%, p<0.001). Two patients (3.8%) in the PTBD group experienced catheter tract implantation metastasis after curative resection during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: EBD was associated with a higher risk of procedure-related complications than PTBD. These complications were managed properly without severe morbidity; however, in the PTBD group, there were two cases of cancer dissemination along the catheter tract.
Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Bile Duct Neoplasms/*surgery ; Bile Ducts/surgery ; Cholangitis/etiology ; Drainage/adverse effects/*methods ; Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/adverse effects/*methods ; Female ; Humans ; Klatskin Tumor/*surgery ; Liver/surgery ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Pancreatitis/etiology ; Postoperative Complications/etiology ; Preoperative Care/adverse effects/*methods ; Treatment Outcome

PURPOSE: To evaluate the influence of preoperative mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) based on the occurrence of anastomosis leakage, surgical site infection (SSI), and severity of surgical complication when performing elective colorectal surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MBP and non-MBP patients were matched using propensity score. The outcomes were evaluated according to tumor location such as right- (n=84) and left-sided colon (n=50) and rectum (n=100). In the non-MBP group, patients with right-sided colon cancer did not receive any preparation, and patients with both left-sided colon and rectal cancers were given one rectal enema before surgery. RESULTS: In the right-sided colon surgery, there was no anastomosis leakage. SSI occurred in 2 (4.8%) and 4 patients (9.5%) in the non-MBP and MBP groups, respectively. In the left-sided colon cancer surgery, there was one anastomosis leakage (4.0%) in each group. SSI occurred in none in the rectal enema group and in 2 patients (8.0%) in the MBP group. In the rectal cancer surgery, there were 5 anastomosis leakages (10.0%) in the rectal enema group and 2 (4.0%) in the MBP group. SSI occurred in 3 patients (6.0%) in each groups. Severe surgical complications (Grade III, IV, or V) based on Dindo-Clavien classification, occurred in 7 patients (14.0%) in the rectal enema group and 1 patient (2.0%) in the MBP group (p=0.03). CONCLUSION: Right- and left-sided colon cancer surgery can be performed safely without MBP. In rectal cancer surgery, rectal enema only before surgery seems to be dangerous because of the higher rate of severe postoperative complications.
Aged ; Anastomosis, Surgical ; Colorectal Surgery/adverse effects/*methods ; Elective Surgical Procedures/*adverse effects/methods ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Preoperative Care/*adverse effects/methods ; *Propensity Score ; Retrospective Studies ; Surgical Wound Infection/epidemiology ; Treatment Outcome

OBJECTIVETo explore the feasibility and safety of enteral nutrition in preoperative bowel preparation for rectal cancer patients undergoing radical operation.

METHODSSixty rectal cancer patients undergoing selective low anterior resection were randomized into the trial group(n=30) and the control group(n=30). Patients in the trial group received clean liquid integral protein diet for 3 days before operation without mechanical bowel preparation. Patients in the control group received traditional diet and mechanical bowel preparation. The intraoperative and postoperative clinical data, the quality of bowel preparation, postoperative complications, and nutritional parameters were compared between the two groups.

RESULTSThere were no significant differences in clinicopathological characteristics between the two groups before operation. The operative time, blood loss, quality of bowel preparation as well as postoperative hospital stay were not significantly different(all P>0.05). While the time to first flatus [(2.53±0.91) d vs. (3.03±0.68) d] and semi-liquid diet intake[(3.95±0.83) d vs. (4.52±1.14) d] were significantly shorter in the trial group as compared with the control group(all P<0.05). There were no death and no significant difference in postoperative complications [16.7%(5/30) vs. 20.0%(6/30), P>0.05]. The levels of postoperative total protein, albumin, and prealbumin decreased significantly. Meanwhile, the levels of postoperative albumin[(36.2±2.5) g/L vs. (33.5±2.6) g/L, P<0.01] and prealbumin [(325.4±28.2) mg/L vs. (302.5±34.2) mg/L, P<0.01] in the trial group were significantly higher than those in the control group.

CONCLUSIONSPreoperative enteral nutrition can replace the mechanical bowel preparation with better efficacy, and improve the postoperative nutritional status without increasing surgical risk in rectal cancer patients undergoing radical operation.

Digestive System Surgical Procedures ; adverse effects ; Enteral Nutrition ; Humans ; Postoperative Complications ; Preoperative Care ; methods ; Rectal Neoplasms ; surgery

OBJECTIVETo evaluate safety and efficacy of preoperative administration of enteral nutrition support in gastric cancer patients at risk of malnutrition.

METHODSA single center randomized controlled clinical trial was performed in 60 gastric cancer patients in West China Hospital from May to October 2012. Thirty patients were given enteral nutrition support(Ensure(R)) manufactured by Abbott Laboratories for ten consecutive days before surgical operation in the treatment group, and 30 patients were given an isocaloric and isonitrogenous homogenized diet in the control group for 10 days as well. The laboratory parameters of nutritional status and hepatorenal function were observed and compared between the two groups on admission, preoperative day 1 and postoperative day 3, respectively. Clinical observations, such as nausea and vomiting, were carried out until patients were discharged.

RESULTSBefore the intervention, there were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics between the two groups. The levels of serum albumin [(33.9±5.6) g/L vs. (31.0±5.3) g/L, P<0.05], and hemoglobin[(103.4±7.7) g/L vs.(96.6±10.5) g/L, P<0.01] were significantly improved in the treatment group on postoperative day 3. However, the levels of body mass index, lymphocyte count, liver and renal function, serum glucose, sodium, and potassium were not significantly different between the two groups(all P>0.05). Moreover, two patients with nausea and one with vomiting in each group were found. In clinical observation period, no severe treatment-related adverse event were observed.

CONCLUSIONThe enteral supplement with Ensure(R) in gastric cancer patients at risk of malnutrition during preoperative period is effective and safe, which is superior to homogenized diet and an appropriate choice for gastric cancer patients with nutritional risk.

Enteral Nutrition ; Gastrectomy ; adverse effects ; Humans ; Malnutrition ; etiology ; prevention & control ; Nutritional Status ; Postoperative Period ; Preoperative Care ; methods ; Risk Factors ; Stomach Neoplasms ; surgery

In the past several years of 21 century, there are many updates of concepts on the diagnosis and treatment of colorectal cancer, which indicates the era of experience-based medicine has been gradually replaced by that of evidence-based medicine. Despite emerging evidence from randomized controlled trials(RCT) and meta-analyses questioning its use, concurrent suggestion on the indication of preoperative bowel preparation has not been reached. The authors agree with the opinion of The Huang Jia-si Textbook of Surgery(7th Edition). Preoperative bowel preparation should be emphasized before the consensus is confirmed, though there are so many trials showing that bowel preparation before elective colorectal surgery was unnecessary. In the authors' consideration, compared with the Westerner, the Chinese prefer to the food style of low fat and high cellulose, which would make more food residue. So whether the oversea finding of the preoperative bowel preparation is fit for the colorectal patients in China is questioned. Therefore large-sample, multi-centre, prospective RCT is expected to be carried out by the national academic organization, by which high-ranking evidence suitable for the Chinese could be obtained.
Colorectal Surgery ; Elective Surgical Procedures ; Enema ; adverse effects ; methods ; Humans ; Preoperative Care

We performed a prospective cohort trial on 220 patients undergoing elective off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery and taking aspirin to evaluate the effect of aspirin resistance on myocardial injury. The patients were divided into aspirin responders and aspirin non-responders by the value of the aspirin reaction units obtained preoperatively using the VerifyNow(TM) Aspirin Assay. The serum levels of troponin I were measured before surgery and 1, 6, 24, 48 and 72 hr after surgery. In-hospital major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, graft occlusion, the postoperative blood loss and reexploration for bleeding were recorded. Of the 220 patients, 181 aspirin responders (82.3%) and 39 aspirin non-responders (17.7%) were defined. There were no significant differences in troponin I levels (ng/mL) between aspirin responders and aspirin non-responders: preoperative (0.04 +/- 0.08 vs 0.03 +/- 0.06; P = 0.56), postoperative 1 hr (0.72 +/- 0.87 vs 0.86 +/- 1.10; P = 0.54), 6 hr (2.92 +/- 8.76 vs 1.50 +/- 2.40; P = 0.94), 24 hr (4.16 +/- 13.44 vs 1.25 +/- 1.95; P = 0.52), 48 hr (2.15 +/- 7.06 vs 0.65 +/- 0.95; P = 0.64) and 72 hr (1.20 +/- 4.63 vs 0.38 +/- 0.56; P = 0.47). Moreover, no significant differences were observed with regard to in-hospital outcomes. In conclusion, preoperative aspirin resistance does not increase myocardial injury in patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery. Postoperative dual antiplatelet therapy might have protected aspirin resistant patients.
Aged ; Aspirin/*administration & dosage ; Cohort Studies ; Coronary Artery Bypass, Off-Pump/*adverse effects ; Coronary Disease/*surgery ; Drug Resistance ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Myocardial Infarction/etiology ; Myocardial Reperfusion Injury/*prevention & control ; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/*administration & dosage ; Postoperative Hemorrhage/etiology ; Preoperative Care/methods ; Prospective Studies ; Stroke/etiology ; Troponin I/blood

This study aimed to assess the influence of lobectomy and pneumonectomy on cardiac rhythm and on the dimensions and function of the right-side of the heart. Twelve dogs undergoing lobectomy and eight dogs undergoing pneumonectomy were evaluated preoperatively and one month postoperatively with electrocardiography and Doppler echocardiography at rest. Pulmonary artery systolic pressure (PASP) was estimated by the tricuspid regurgitation jet (TRJ) via the pulse wave Doppler velocity method. Systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria (SIRS) were also evaluated based on the clinical and hematological findings in response to lobectomy and pneumonectomy. Following lobectomy and pneumonectomy, we predominantly detected atrial fibrillation and varying degrees of atrioventricular block (AVB). Dogs that died within seven days of the lobectomy (n = 2) or pneumonectomy (n = 1) had complete AVB. Preoperative right atrial, right ventricular, and pulmonary artery dimensions increased gradually during the 30 days (p<0.05) following pneumonectomy, but did not undergo significant changes during that same period after lobectomy. Mean PASP was 56.0 +/- 4.5 mmHg in dogs having significant TRJ after pneumonectomy. Pneumonectomy, but not lobectomy, could lead to increases (p<0.01) in the SIRS score within the first day post-surgery. In brief, it is important to conduct pre- and postoperative cardiac evaluation of dogs undergoing lung resections because cardiac problems are a common postoperative complication after such surgeries. In particular, complete AVB should be considered a life-threatening complication after pneumonectomy and lobectomy. In addition, pneumonectomy appears to increase the likelihood of pulmonary hypertension development in dogs.
Animals ; Atrial Fibrillation/diagnosis/veterinary ; Atrioventricular Block/diagnosis/*veterinary ; Blood Pressure/physiology ; Dogs ; Echocardiography/veterinary ; Electrocardiography/veterinary ; Pneumonectomy/adverse effects/*veterinary ; Postoperative Care/methods/*veterinary ; Postoperative Complications/diagnosis/*veterinary ; Preoperative Care/methods/*veterinary ; Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome/diagnosis/etiology/veterinary ; Tricuspid Valve Insufficiency/diagnosis/etiology/veterinary