Testing of a promising gel for the prevention of epidural fibrosis in an experiment on a laminectomy model

Surgical treatment of  spinal diseases is  often complicated by  epidural fibrosis, which is one of the main causes of failed back surgery syndrome.

The aim. To evaluate the laminectomy zone and transformation of epidural fibrosis using original gels in an experiment.

Materials and methods. Laminectomy was performed on  male Wistar rats. The animals were divided into four groups. The original gels were tested. The group of intact (unoperated) rats served as a comparison group for the control and groups with the tested gels, carrying and not carrying the p38 MAP kinase blocker. On day 28, the deformation of the dural sac was assessed by measuring the transverse and longitudinal sections of the spinal canal, also the adhesion of the spinal roots to the inner layer of the dura mater in epidural fibrosis and its coverage with connective tissue along the perimeter of the laminectomy window were determined.

Results. In the control group, the pronounced deformation ofthe dural sac was observed. The use of all the studied gels reduced the deformation, bringing the shape ofthe dural sac closer to the norm. However, the gel with the p38 MAP kinase blocker significantly reduced the adhesion of the spinal roots to the dura mater.

Conclusion. For the first time, a pharmaceutical composition containing a p38 MAP kinase blocker was used andstudied ona laminectomy model forthe prevention of epidural fibrosis, and the relationships between the transformation and change in the shape of the dural sac with an assessment of the involvement of the dura mater in the formation of epidural fibrosis were presented. The results obtained show that a gel with a p38 MAP kinase blocker is more effective for the prevention of epidural fibrosis than a gel without a blocker.

1. Kozlov DM, Krutko AV, Bulatov AV. Application of the original method to mobilize dural structures for epidural fibrosis of the lumbar spinal canal in reoperations. Russian Journal of Spine Surgery (Khirurgiya Pozvonochnika). 2015; 12(3): 44-48. (In Russ.). doi: 10.14531/ss2015.3.44-48

2. Sorokovikov VA, Zhivotenko AP, Larionov SN, Shurygina IA, Potapov VE. Analysis of the risks of damage to the dura mater in surgery for degenerative pathology of the lumbar spine. Polytrauma. 2023; 2: 64-73. (In Russ.). doi: 10.24412/1819-1495-2023-2-64-73

3. Grin АА, Nikitin АS, Yusupov S-ER. Surgical treatment of spinal canal stenosis at the lumbar level in the elderly and senile patients. Russian Journal of Neurosurgery. 2020; 22(1): 93-102. (In Russ.). doi: 10.17650/1683-3295-2020-22-1-93-102

4. Howard H, Clark P, Garrett M, Wise A, Kee M, Checketts J, et al. A cross-sectional analysis of harms reporting in systematic reviews evaluating laminectomy. N Am Spine Soc J. 2023; 13: 100198. doi: 10.1016/j.xnsj.2022.100198

5. Zileli M, Crostelli M, Grimaldi M, Mazza O, Anania C, Fornari M, et al. Natural course and diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis: WFNS Spine Committee recommendations. World Neurosurg X. 2020; 7: 100073. doi: 10.1016/j.wnsx.2020.100073

6. Alizadeh R, Sharifzadeh SR. Pathogenesis, etiology and treatment of failed back surgery syndrome. Neurochirurgie. 2022; 68(4): 426-431. doi: 10.1016/j.neuchi.2021.09.005

7. Manchikanti L, Knezevic NN, Sanapati SP, Sanapati MR, Kaye AD, Hirsch JA. Are percutaneous adhesiolysis effective in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain in postsurgery syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2020; 24(6): 30. doi: 10.1007/s11916-020-00862-y

8. Takenaka S, Makino T, Sakai Y, Kashii M, Iwasaki M, Yoshikawa H, et al. Dural tear is associated with an increased rate of other perioperative complications in primary lumbar spine surgery for degenerative diseases. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019; 98(1): e13970. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000013970

9. Berthelot JM, Douane F, Ploteau S, Le Goff B, DarrieutortLaffite C. Venous congestion as a central mechanism of radiculopathies. Joint Bone Spine. 2022; 89(2): 105291. doi: 10.1016/j.jbspin.2021.105291

10. Masopust V, Holubová J, Skalický P, Rokyta R, Fricová J, Lacman J, et al. Neuromodulation in the treatment of postoperative epidural fibrosis: Comparison of the extent of epidural fibrosis and the effect of stimulation. Physiol Res. 2021; 70(3): 461-468. doi: 10.33549/physiolres.934617

11. Liao J, Li X, Fan Y. Prevention strategies of postoperative adhesion in soft tissues by applying biomaterials: Based on the mechanisms of occurrence and development of adhe sions. Bioact Mater. 2023; 26: 387-412. doi: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2023.02.026

12. Lewik G, Lewik G, Müller LS, von Glinski A, Schulte TL, Lange T. Postoperative epidural fibrosis: Challenges and opportunities – a review. Spine Surg Relat Res. 2023; 8(2): 133-142. doi: 10.22603/ssrr.2023-0106

13. Zhang Y, Wei FL, Liu ZX, Zhou CP, Du MR, Quan J, et al. Comparison of posterior decompression techniques and conventional laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis. Front Surg. 2022; 9: 997973. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.997973

14. Weigel R, Capelle H-H, Al-Afif S, Krauss JK. The dimensions of “failed back surgery syndrome”: What is behind a label? Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2021; 163(1): 245-250. doi: 10.1007/s00701-020-04548-7

15. Wang H, Sun W, Fu D, Shen Y, Chen YY, Wang LL. Update on biomaterials for prevention of epidural adhesion after lumbar laminectomy. J Orthop Translat. 2018; 13: 41-49. doi: 10.1016/j.jot.2018.02.001

16. Kheilnezhad B, Hadjizadeh A. A review: Progress in preventing tissue adhesions from a biomaterial perspective. Biomater Sci. 2021; 9(8): 2850-2873. doi: 10.1039/d0bm02023k

17. Bosscher HA, Heavner JE. Incidence and severity of epidural fibrosis after back surgery: An endoscopic study. Pain Pract. 2010; 10(1): 18-24. doi: 10.1111/j.1533-2500.2009.00311.x

18. Goldberg OA, Zhivotenko AP, Samoilova LG, Sorokovikov VA, Shurygina IA. Change of the shape of the dural sac in the laminectomy model at different stages of the reparation in the experiment. Acta biomedica scientifica. 2020; 5(6): 259-264. (In Russ.). doi: 10.29413/ABS.2020-5.6.34

19. LaRocca H, Macnab I. The laminectomy membrane. Studies in its evolution, characteristics, effects and prophylaxis in dogs. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1974; 56B(3): 545-550.

20. He Y, Revel M, Loty B. A quantitative model of postlaminectomy scar formation. Effects of a nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1995; 20(5): 557-580. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199503010-00010

21. Sae-Jung S, Jirarattanaphochai K, Sumananont C, Wittayapairoj K, Sukhonthamarn K. Interrater reliability of the postoperative epidural fibrosis classification: A histopathologic study in the rat model. Asian Spine J. 2015; 9(4): 587-594. doi: 10.4184/asj.2015.9.4.587

22. Shurygina IA, Zhivotenko AP, Shurygin MG, Goldberg OA, Sorokovikov VA. Pharmaceutical composition for the prevention of epidural fibrosis and a method for its use. Patent 2796371, Russian Federation; 2023; (15). (In Russ.).

23. Gierthmuehlen M, Kaminsky J. Microsurgical approach to spinal canal in rats. In: Janowski M. (eds) Experimental neurosurgery in animal models. Neuromethods. New York, NY: Humana Press, 2016; 116. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-3730-1_9

24. Shurygina IA, Shurygin MG. Method for preparing a bone tissue preparation and a kit for its implementation. Patent 2500104 Russian Federation. 2013; (34). (In Russ.).