Mechanical and oral antibiotics bowel preparation for elective rectal cancer surgery: A propensity score matching analysis using a nationwide inpatient database in Japan

AIM: The best bowel preparation method for rectal surgery remains controversial. In this study we compared the efficacy and safety of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) alone and MOABP (MBP combined with oral antibiotic bowel preparation [OABP]) for rectal cancer surgery. METHODS: In this retrospective study we analyzed data from the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination (DPC) database on 37 291 patients who had undergone low anterior resection for rectal cancer from 2014 to 2017. Propensity score matching analysis was used to compare postoperative outcomes between MBP alone and MOABP. RESULTS: A total of 37 291 patients were divided into four groups: MBP alone: 77.7%, no bowel preparation (NBP): 16.9%, MOABP: 4.7%, and OABP alone: 0.7%. In propensity score matching analysis with 1756 pairs, anastomotic leakage (4.84% vs 7.86%, P < 0.001), small bowel obstruction (1.54% vs 3.08%, P = 0.002) and reoperation (3.76% vs 5.98%, P = 0.002) were less in the MOABP group than in the MBP group. The mean duration of postoperative antibiotics medication was shorter in the MOABP group (5.2 d vs 7.5 d, P < 0.001) than in the MBP group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the incidence of Clostridium difficile (CD) colitis (0.40% vs 0.68%, P = 0.250) and methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colitis (0.11% vs 0.17%, P = 0.654). There was no significant difference in in‐hospital mortality between the two groups (0.00% vs 0.11% respectively, P = 0.157). CONCLUSION: MOABP for rectal surgery is associated with a decreased incidence of postoperative complications without increasing the incidence of CD colitis and MRSA colitis.