胃肠减压在择期结直肠癌术后有效性和安全性的Meta分析

Effectiveness and Safety of Nasogastric Decompression Placement in Operations after Elective Colorectal Cancer Surgery:Meta Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

目的评价胃肠减压在择期结直肠癌根治术后的有效性和安全性。方法计算机检索PubMed、EM-Base、Cochrane Library、中国生物医学文献数据库、中国期刊全文数据库、维普中文科技期刊数据库,手工检索相关领域的杂志,同时从纳入文献的参考文献中查找符合要求的随机对照试验,采用RevMan 5.0软件进行统计分析。结果共纳入4篇随机对照试验,Meta分析结果显示:结直肠癌根治术后胃肠减压组与非胃肠减压组恶心和呕吐发生率〔RR=2.29,95%CI(1.87,2.79)〕、咽喉炎发生率〔RR=0.19,95%CI(0.10,0.40)〕、呼吸道感染发生率〔RR=0.44,95%CI(0.21,0.94)〕比较,差异均有统计学意义,而肠梗阻发生率〔RR=1.01,95%CI(0.20,5.09)〕、切口感染发生率〔RR=0.87,95%CI(0.32,2.33)〕比较,差异均无统计学意义。结论当前证据表明择期结直肠癌根治术后不推荐常规放置胃肠减压管。

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of nasogastric decompression tubes after elective color- ectal cancer surgery. Methods Database of PubMed, EMBase, Cochrane Library, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Chinese Scientific Journals full - text database and VIP Chinese Science and Technology Journals database were retrieved by com- puter, and relevant magazines were retrieved manually. Randomized controlled trials that met the criteria were selected. RevMan 5.0 was used to analyze the data. Results Four randomized controlled trials were selected. The result of meta analysis showed that the incidence of nausea and vomiting [ RR =2. 29, 95% CI （ 1.87, 2.79） ~, pharyngolaryngitis [ RR = 0. 19, 95% CI （0. 10, 0. 40） ~, respiratory infection [ RR = 0. 44, 95% CI （0. 21, 0. 94） ~ between nasogastric decompression group and non nasogastrie decompression group showed statistically significant differences. While the incidence of intestinal obstruction [ RR = 1.01, 95% CI （0. 20, 5. 09） ）, wound infection [ RR =0. 87, 95% CI （0. 32, 2. 33） ] of the two groups showed no sta- tistically significant differences. Conclusion Current evidence shows that placing nasogastric decompression tubes are not recom- mended for patients after elective eolorectal cancer surgery.