Preview

Acta Biomedica Scientifica

Advanced search

An examination of hepatotoxicity and nephrotoxicity of a new antiadhesive preparation (experimental study)

https://doi.org/10.12737/article_59f03600d074b4.31010834

Abstract

Adhesive process in the abdominal cavity was simulated in Wistar rats. The animals were divided into two groups: the main one - simulation of adhesive process in the abdominal cavity and introduction of 3 ml of saline into the abdominal cavity; and the controls - simulation of adhesive process in the abdominal cavity and introduction of 3 ml of new antiadhesive preparation. We evaluated biochemical parameters at eight time points during the period from 2 hours to 28 days. The introduced drug for adhesion prevention did not affect the protein-synthetic function of the liver: the blood level of whole protein was the same in both groups and remained within the normal range throughout the follow-up period. The blood level of creatinine, which is the end product of protein metabolism reflecting the renal excretory function, was within normal values in both groups throughout the observation period. Significant differences between the groups were noted only on the 28th day of the experiment: in the main group creatinine level was higher as compared to the control group (p = 0.014), but remained within the normal range. The same pattern was observed when evaluating the blood urea level, which reflects the renal excretory function - the blood urea level remained normal in both groups throughout the experiment. Hence, the new antiadhesive drug does not produce toxic effect on liver and kidneys in a single intraperitoneal introduction in experiment. Biochemical indices are the same as in single intraperitoneal infusion of saline.

About the Authors

I. A. Shurygina
Irkutsk Scientific Center of Surgery and Traumatology
Russian Federation


N. I. Ayushinova
Irkutsk Scientific Center of Surgery and Traumatology
Russian Federation


L. V. Rodionova
Irkutsk Scientific Center of Surgery and Traumatology
Russian Federation


E. E. Chepurnykh
Irkutsk State Medical University; Irkutsk Scientific Center of Surgery and Traumatology
Russian Federation


M. G. Shurygin
Irkutsk Scientific Center of Surgery and Traumatology; Pharmasyntez, J.S.C
Russian Federation


References

1. Аюшинова Н.И., Шурыгина И.А., Шурыгин М.Г., Панасюк А.И. Современные подходы к профилактике спаечного процесса в брюшной полости // Сибирский медицинский журнал. - 2011. - Т. 105, № 6. - С. 16-20

2. Аюшинова Н.И., Шурыгина И.А., Шурыгин М.Г., Лепехова С.А., Балыкина А.В., Малгатаева Е.Р., Попова А.Д., Янкелевич С.А. Экспериментальная модель для разработки способов профилактики спаечного процесса в брюшной полости // Сибирский медицинский журнал. - 2012. - Т. 109, N 2. - С. 51-53

3. Бурлев В.А., Дубинская Е.Д., Гаспаров А.С. Перитонеальные спайки: от патогенеза до профилактики // Проблемы репродукции. - 2009. - № 3. - С. 36-44

4. Меньшиков В.В. Обеспечение качества лабораторных исследований. Преаналитический этап. -М.: Лабинформ, 1999. - 318 с

5. Способ моделирования спаечного процесса в брюшной полости: Патент № 2467401 Рос. Федерация; МПК G09B 23/28 (2006.01) / Аюшинова Н.И., Лепехова С.А., Шурыгина И.А., Рой Т.А., Шурыгин М.Г., Зарицкая Л.В., Гольдберг О.А.; заявитель и патентообладатель Учреждение Российской академии медицинских наук Научный центр реконструктивной и восстановительной хирургии Сибирского отделения РАМН (НЦРВХ СО РАМН). - № 2011131678/14; заявл. 27.07.2011; опубл. 20.11.2012. - Бюл. № 32

6. Шурыгина И.А., Шурыгин М.Г., Аюшинова Н.И., Каня О.В. Фибробласты и их роль в развитии соединительной ткани // Сибирский медицинский журнал. -2012. - Т. 110, № 3. - С. 8-12

7. Шурыгина И.А., Шурыгин М.Г., Зеленин Н.В., Гранина Г.Б. Роль MAP-киназных механизмов в регуляции клеточного роста // Сибирский медицинский журнал. - 2009. - Т. 89, № 6. - С. 36-40

8. Amid P.K. (2002). Hyaluronate does not prevent adhesions. J. Surg. Res., 107 (2), 219-222.

9. Aydin C. (2006). Effect of temporary abdominal closure on colonic anastomosis and postoperative adhesions in experimental secondary peritonitis. World J. Surg., 30 (4), 612-619.

10. Beck D.E., Cohen Z., Fleshman J.W., Kaufman H., van Goor H., Wolff B. (2003). A prospective, randomized, multicenter, controlled study of the safety of Seprafilm adhesion barrier in abdominopelvic surgery of the intestine. Dis. Colon. Rectum, 46 (10), 1310-1319.

11. Di Zerega G.S., Verco S.J., Young P., Kettel M., Kobak W., Martin D., Sanfilippo J., Peers E.M., Scrimgeour A., Brown C.B. (2002). A randomized, controlled pilot study of the safety and efficacy of 4% icodextrin solution in the reduction of adhesions following laparoscopic gynaecological surgery. Hum. Reprod., 17 (4), 1031-1038.

12. Glantz S.A., Slinker B.K. (2000). Primer of applied regression and analysis of variance. N.Y., 949.

13. The Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. The Society of Reproductive Surgeons. (2007). Pathogenesis, consequences, and control of peritoneal adhesions in gynecologic surgery. Fertil., 88, 21-26.

14. Shurygin M.G., Shurygina I.A. Compounds, pharmaceutical compositions and a method for the prophylaxis and treatment of the adhesion process. Patent W02012156938, March 20, 2014.


Review

For citations:


Shurygina I.A., Ayushinova N.I., Rodionova L.V., Chepurnykh E.E., Shurygin M.G. An examination of hepatotoxicity and nephrotoxicity of a new antiadhesive preparation (experimental study). Acta Biomedica Scientifica. 2017;2(3):92-96. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.12737/article_59f03600d074b4.31010834

Views: 557


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2541-9420 (Print)
ISSN 2587-9596 (Online)