TABLE 1.
League tables
| Primary analysis: all RCTs | Sensitivity analysis: RCTs with laparoscopic surgery only or with both open and laparoscopic colorectal surgery | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total SSI (RR with 95% CI) | Total SSI (RR with 95% CI) | ||||||
| MBP-OA P-score 0.944 |
MBP-OA | ||||||
| 0.84 (0.60–1.19) |
OA P-score 0.717 |
0.56(0.31–0.99) | OA | ||||
| 0.57(0.45–0.72) | 0.68(0.49–0.95) | None P-score 0.230 |
0.41(0.27–0.62) | 0.73 (0.48–1.12) |
None | ||
| 0.55(0.47–0.65) | 0.65(0.46–0.92) | 0.96 (0.79–1.15) |
MBP P-score 0.110 |
0.44(0.34–0.58) | 0.80 (0.46–1.38) |
1.09 (0.74–1.59) |
MBP |
| Anastomotic leakage (RR with 95% CI) | Anastomotic leakage (RR with 95% CI) | ||||||
| MBP-OA P-score 0.967 |
*0.55(0.40-0.70) | MBP-OA | |||||
| 0.76 (0.51–1.15) |
OA P-score 0.645 |
0.54 (0.29–1.03) |
OA | ||||
| 0.63(0.47–0.84) | 0.83 (0.59–1.17) |
MBP P-score 0.276 |
*0.85 (0.65–1.07) |
0.50(0.35–0.71) | 1.14 (0.60–2.16) |
MBP | |
| 0.59(0.42–0.84) | 0.78(0.61–0.99) | 0.94 (0.73–1.21) |
None P-score 0.111 |
0.45(0.26–0.80) | 0.83 (0.64–1.07) |
0.72 (0.40–1.30) |
None |
| Mortality (RR with 95% CI) | Mortality (RR with 95% CI) | ||||||
| MBP P-score 0.615 |
MBP | ||||||
| 0.95 (0.57–1.59) |
MBP-OA P-score 0.526 |
1.12 (0.52–2.43) |
MBP-OA | ||||
| 0.94 (0.60–1.46) |
0.99 (0.51–1.91) |
None P-score 0.496 |
0.74 (0.01–69.25) |
0.65 (0.01–61.51) |
None | ||
| 0.78 (0.24–2.58) |
0.87 (0.26–2.57) |
0.83 (0.24–2.84) |
OA P-score 0.363 |
0.18 (0.18–27.26) |
0.16 (0.00–24.22) |
0.24 (0.03–2.11) |
OA |
League tables showing the network relative risks of pairwise comparisons between different bowel preparation methods. Calculated P-scores are shown, a higher P-score (nearing 1) means that the treatment modality is preferable, a score nearing 0 means the treatment is least preferable. RR with 95% CI in bold are statistically significant.
*RR with 95% CI of direct comparisons.