Clinical trial NCT06029790: The Effect of Chewing Gum on Nausea, Vomiting and Bowel Function After Colorectal Surgery
Official title: The Effect of Chewing Gum on Nausea, Vomiting and Bowel Functions After Colorectal Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Study
Study type: INTERVENTIONAL
Overall status: COMPLETED
Phase: NA
Conditions: Postsurgical Ileus
Keywords: postsurgical ileus
chewing gum
colorectal surgery
Lead sponsor: Cukurova University
Sponsor class: OTHER
Collaborators: name: Tarsus University
First posted: 2023-09-08
Enrollment: 76
Sex: ALL
Minimum age (years): 18
Standard ages: ADULT
OLDER_ADULT
Accepts healthy volunteers: no
Allocation: RANDOMIZED
Intervention model: PARALLEL
Intervention model description: The study was planned as a prospective, single-blind, parallel-group, randomized controlled study.
Primary purpose: SUPPORTIVE_CARE

Brief summary: False feeding refers to promoting gastrointestinal peristalsis by seeing, smelling, chewing, and tasting food, not getting food into the gastrointestinal tract. Postoperative sham feeding uses gum to promote the healing of gastrointestinal peristalsis. Although not fully understood, the physiological theory underlying gum chewing (fake feeding) to stimulate peristalsis and reduce postoperative intestinal recovery time is that the oral and chewing stimulation provided by chewing gum stimulates a neurohumoral reflex that increases gastrointestinal fluid secretion. This increases gastrointestinal motility. In addition, oral stimulation and chewing can stimulate the vagus nerve, which is also involved in promoting peristalsis. Finally, none of the existing theories adequately explain the effect of chewing/gum chewing on reducing postoperative inflammation in the gut, which may result in a reduced incidence of postoperative infection. In previous studies, physiological changes associated with gum appear to promote normal gastrointestinal function and subsequent postoperative/anesthetic recovery. Although many studies have been conducted to examine the effectiveness of chewing gum in patients undergoing colorectal resection, the results have been inconsistent. This can be attributed to differences in intestinal injuries affecting bowel function, differences in time under anesthesia and differences in anesthetics or pain control agents used for pain control affecting bowel function, and recovery time of peristalsis. Given the many factors known to affect postoperative ileus, chewing gum as an intervention remains a safe, accessible, and inexpensive option that remains to be explored.

Detailed description: False feeding refers to promoting gastrointestinal peristalsis by seeing, smelling, chewing and tasting food, not getting food into the gastrointestinal tract. Postoperative sham feeding uses gum to promote healing of gastrointestinal peristalsis. Although not fully understood, the physiological theory underlying gum chewing (fake feeding) to stimulate peristalsis and reduce postoperative intestinal recovery time is that the oral and chewing stimulation provided by chewing gum stimulates a neurohumoral reflex that increases gastrointestinal fluid secretion. This increases gastrointestinal motility. In addition, oral stimulation and chewing can stimulate the vagus nerve, which is also involved in promoting peristalsis. Finally, none of the existing theories adequately explain the effect of chewing/gum chewing on reducing postoperative inflammation in the gut, which may result in a reduced incidence of postoperative infection. Previous studies have shown that physiological changes associated with gum support normal gastrointestinal function and subsequent postoperative/anesthetic recovery.

Some studies have shown that chewing gum after colorectal resection reduces postoperative flatulence and defecation time. showed that it reduces the risk of postoperative ileus. In contrast, some studies in patients undergoing open abdominal surgery or laparoscopy for various types of colorectal resection have shown no effect of chewing gum on postoperative first flatulence and time to defecation, has no significant effect in reducing the average hospital stay and has no significant effect in preventing postoperative nausea, vomiting, or bloating.

One possible reason for the inconsistent results of sham feeding using chewing gum to reduce the incidence of postoperative ileus may be differences in underlying colorectal cancer types and heterogeneity between surgical and postoperative care methods.

Although many studies have been conducted to examine the effectiveness of chewing gum in patients undergoing colorectal resection, the results have been inconsistent. This can be attributed to differences in intestinal injuries affecting bowel function, differences in time under anesthesia differences in anesthetics or pain control agents used for pain control affecting bowel function, and recovery time of peristalsis. Given the many factors known to affect postoperative ileus, chewing gum as an intervention remains a safe, accessible, and inexpensive option that remains to be explored. This study will provide empirical evidence that contributes to a body of literature supporting gum administration for affecting postoperative nausea, flatulence, and stool output in a well-defined sample.

Many interventions and strategies have been used to manage postoperative ileus, such as prokinetic agents and epidural anesthesia. However, these methods have limited efficacy and still have a relatively high incidence of postoperative ileus. Alternatively, chewing gum promotes gastrointestinal peristalsis in post-surgery patients without the adverse effects associated with early feeding. However, results in studies investigating the effect of chewing gum on postoperative recovery of gastrointestinal function after colorectal surgery are conflicting.

Eligibility criteria: Inclusion Criteria: Being over 18 years old,

* To have applied for elective colorectal surgery,
* Having undergone laparoscopic colorectal surgery,
* Not having a nasogastric insertion,
* Not having a vision-hearing problem,
* ECOG performance score to be between 0-2,

Exclusion Criteria:

* Performing emergency surgical intervention,
* Open colorectal surgery
* Need for intensive care after surgery,
* Stoma has been opened

Primary outcomes:
measure: prevention of postoperative ileus
timeFrame: 72 hours
measure: Prevention of nausea-vomiting.
timeFrame: 72 saat
Secondary outcomes:
Other outcomes:
Locations:
city: Adana
country: Turkey
facility: Cukurova University
Study officials:
References:
citation: van den Heijkant TC, Costes LM, van der Lee DG, Aerts B, Osinga-de Jong M, Rutten HR, Hulsewe KW, de Jonge WJ, Buurman WA, Luyer MD. Randomized clinical trial of the effect of gum chewing on postoperative ileus and inflammation in colorectal surgery. Br J Surg. 2015 Feb;102(3):202-11. doi: 10.1002/bjs.9691. Epub 2014 Dec 18.
citation: Yang P, Long WJ, Wei L. Chewing Xylitol Gum could Accelerate Bowel motility Recovery after Elective Open Proctectomy for Rectal Cancer. Rev Invest Clin. 2018;70(1):53-58. doi: 10.24875/RIC.18002428.
citation: Liu Q, Jiang H, Xu D, Jin J. Effect of gum chewing on ameliorating ileus following colorectal surgery: A meta-analysis of 18 randomized controlled trials. Int J Surg. 2017 Nov;47:107-115. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.07.107. Epub 2017 Sep 1.
citation: Hsu YC, Szu SY. Effects of Gum Chewing on Recovery From Postoperative Ileus: A Randomized Clinical Trail. J Nurs Res. 2022 Oct 1;30(5):e233. doi: 10.1097/jnr.0000000000000510.
citation: Lee JT, Hsieh MH, Cheng PJ, Lin JR. The Role of Xylitol Gum Chewing in Restoring Postoperative Bowel Activity After Cesarean Section. Biol Res Nurs. 2016 Mar;18(2):167-72. doi: 10.1177/1099800415592966. Epub 2015 Jul 7.
citation: Forrester DA, Doyle-Munoz J, McTigue T, D'Andrea S, Natale-Ryan A. The efficacy of gum chewing in reducing postoperative ileus: a multisite randomized controlled trial. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2014 May-Jun;41(3):227-32. doi: 10.1097/WON.0000000000000019.
citation: Kobayashi T, Masaki T, Kogawa K, Matsuoka H, Sugiyama M. Efficacy of Gum Chewing on Bowel Movement After Open Colectomy for Left-Sided Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Dis Colon Rectum. 2015 Nov;58(11):1058-63. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000452.
citation: Suh SY, Leblanc TW, Shelby RA, Samsa GP, Abernethy AP. Longitudinal patient-reported performance status assessment in the cancer clinic is feasible and prognostic. J Oncol Pract. 2011 Nov;7(6):374-81. doi: 10.1200/JOP.2011.000434.
citation: Oken MM, Creech RH, Tormey DC, Horton J, Davis TE, McFadden ET, Carbone PP. Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol. 1982 Dec;5(6):649-55. No abstract available.
citation: Apfel CC, Laara E, Koivuranta M, Greim CA, Roewer N. A simplified risk score for predicting postoperative nausea and vomiting: conclusions from cross-validations between two centers. Anesthesiology. 1999 Sep;91(3):693-700. doi: 10.1097/00000542-199909000-00022.
citation: Gustafsson UO, Scott MJ, Hubner M, Nygren J, Demartines N, Francis N, Rockall TA, Young-Fadok TM, Hill AG, Soop M, de Boer HD, Urman RD, Chang GJ, Fichera A, Kessler H, Grass F, Whang EE, Fawcett WJ, Carli F, Lobo DN, Rollins KE, Balfour A, Baldini G, Riedel B, Ljungqvist O. Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Elective Colorectal Surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS(R)) Society Recommendations: 2018. World J Surg. 2019 Mar;43(3):659-695. doi: 10.1007/s00268-018-4844-y.