• José Vicente Roig, Alfonso García-Fadrique, Antonio Salvador, Francisco L Villalba, Bárbara Tormos, Miguel Ángel Lorenzo-Liñán, and Juan García-Armengol.
• Unidad de Coloproctología, Servicio de Cirugía General y del Aparato Digestivo, Consorcio Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, Valencia, Spain. roig_jvi@gva.es
• Cir Esp. 2011 Mar 1;89(3):167-74.

IntroductionDespite there being no evidence of the advantages of its use, mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) continues to be routine in colorectal surgery. Our objective is to analyse the impact of its selective use, as regards patient comfort and results, comparing a perioperative multimodal rehabilitation program (MMRH) with conventional care (CC).Material And MethodsA prospective study of 108 patients proposed for elective surgery, assigned consecutively 2:1 to an MMRH protocol which only included MBP in rectal surgery with low anastomosis, or to CC in whom MBP was used except in right colon surgery. We also studied two Groups (A and B) with and without the use of MBP. Their tolerance, results and postoperative recovery variables were analysed.ResultsThirty-nine patients were included in Group A, and 69 in Group B. A MMRH protocol was used in another 69 patients. The Group A patients had more abdominal pain, anal discomfort, nausea and thirst, but there were no differences as regards, death, overall or local complications, whilst there was less complications, suture failures and death in the MMRH when compared with CC Group (P<.05). There were no advantages observed in the use of MBP as regards the start of bowel movements, tolerance to diet or hospital stay, but these parameters were favourable to the MMRH when compared with CC Group.ConclusionsThe restriction of MBP is safe, and associated with an MMRH program, contributes to a faster and more comfortable recovery, without increasing complications.Copyright © 2010 AEC. Published by Elsevier Espana. All rights reserved.

14 keywords...

hide…