Preview

Acta Biomedica Scientifica

Advanced search

The role of polymeric synthetic materials in the development of postoperative adhesion of the peritoneum(experimental study)

https://doi.org/10.29413/ABS.2018-3.3.28

Abstract

Background. Animal models for adhesions induction are heterogeneous and often poorly described. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of surgical trauma with the use of meshes and sutures on postoperative peritoneal adhesions. Methods. In this article we compare and discuss different models for inducing peritoneal adhesions and estimation of the adhesions after surgical trauma and foreign body in a randomized, experimental in vivo animal study with 60 Wistar rats. Animals were divided into four groups because we used four different standardized surgical techniques for peritoneal trauma: brushing of peritoneal sidewall only (Group 1), scarification of the parietal peritoneum and serosa of the cecum (Group 2), brushing as in the previous group and suturing peritoneal sidewall with Prolen (Group 3), brushing as in the second group and mesh were fixated on the peritoneal wall (Group 4). Results. Upon second look, there were significant differences in the adhesion incidence between the groups (p = 0.008). Analysis showed that parameters of adhesion process in Group 3 (86 %) and 4 (86 %) were significantly higher than in Group 2 (60 %) (p = 0.018, p = 0.004). There was no difference between Group 3 and Group 4 (p = 0.40). Conclusions. The presence of synthetic polymeric material in the abdominal cavity increases the prevalence and severity of the postoperative adhesion process of the peritoneum.

About the Authors

I. Y. Bondarevskiy
Ministry of Health of the Chelyabinsk Region; Chelyabinsk Regional Clinical Hospital; South Ural State Medical University
Russian Federation


M. S. Shalmagambetov
South Ural State Medical University
Russian Federation


V. N. Bordunovskiy
South Ural State Medical University
Russian Federation


References

1. Бондаревский И.Я., Шалмагамбетов М.С., Бордуновский В.Н. Оценка эффективности средств профилактики послеоперационного адгезиогенеза в эксперименте // Клиническая и экспериментальная хирургия. Журнал имени академика Б.В. Петровского. - 2017. - Т. 5, № 2 (16). - С. 33-39

2. Женчевский Р.А. Спаечная болезнь. - М.: Медицина, 1989. - 191 с

3. Лазаренко В.А., Конопля А.И., Бежин А.И, Липатов В.А, Гомон М.С., Локтионов А.Л., Жуковский В.А. Морфологические изменения брюшной полости при использовании иммуномодуляторов для профилактики спаечного процесса // Вестник новых медицинских технологий. - 2010. - Т. 17, № 3. - С. 9-13

4. Aquina C.T., Becerra A.Z., Probst C.P., Xu Z., Hensley B.J., Iannuzzi J.C., Noyes K., Monson J.R., Fleming F.J. (2016). Patients with adhesive small bowel obstruction should be primarily managed by a surgical team. Ann Surg, 264 (3), 437-447. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001861

5. Brochhausen C., Schmitt V.H., Rajab T.K., Planck C.N., Krämer B., Tapprich C., Wallwiener M., Hierlemann H., Planck H., Kirkpatrick C.J. (2012) Mesothelial morphology and organization after peritoneal treatment with solid and liquid adhesion barriers - a scanning electron microscopical study. J Mater Sci Mater Med, (23), 1931-1939. DOI: 10.1007/s10856-012-4659-6

6. Ten Broek R.P., Issa Y., van Santbrink E.J., Bouvy N.D., Kruitwagen R.F., Jeekel J., Bakkum E.A., Rovers M.M., van Goor H. (2013) Burden of adhesions in abdominal and pelvic surgery: systematic review and met-analysis. BMJ, 347. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.f5588

7. Catena F., Ansaloni L., Di Saverio S., Pinna A.D. (2012) World Society of Emergency Surgery. P.O.P.A. study: prevention of postoperative abdominal adhesions by ico-dextrin 4 % solution after laparotomy for adhesive small bowel obstruction. A prospective randomized controlled trial. World J Gastrointest Surg, 16 (2), 382-388.

8. Diamond M.P., Linsky C.B., Cunningham T., Constantine B., di Zerega G.S., De Cherney AH. (1987). A model for sidewall adhesions in the rabbit: reduction by an absorbable barrier. Microsurgery, (8), 197-200. DOI: 10.1002/micr.1920080406

9. Kraemer B., Wallwiener C., Rajab T.K., Brochhausen C., Wallwiener M., Rothmund R. (2014) Standardised models for inducing experimental peritoneal adhesions in female rats. Biomed Res Int, Article ID 435056, 8 p., DOI: 10.1155/2014/435056

10. Krielen P., van den Beukel В.А., Stommel M.W.J., van Goor H., Strik C., Ten Broek R.P.G. (2016). In-hospital costs of an admission for adhesive small bowel obstruction. World J Emerg Surg, 11 (49), 2-8. DOI: 10.1186/ s13017-016-0109-y

11. Ozel H., Avsar F.M., Topaloglu S., Sahin M. (2005). Induction and assessment methods used in experimental adhesion studies. Wound Repair Regen, 13 (4), 358-364. DOI: 10.1111/j.1067-1927.2005.130402.x

12. Rajab T.K., Wallwiener M., Talukdar S., Kraemer B. (2009). Adhesion-related complications are common, but rarely discussed in preoperative consent: a multicenter study. World J Surg, 33 (4), 748-750. DOI: 10.1007/s00268-008-9917-x

13. Scott J.W., Olufajo O.A., Brat G.A., Rose J.A., Zogg C.K., Haider A.H. (2016). Use of National Burden to Define Operative Emergency General Surgery. JAMA Surg, 151 (6). DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2016.0480

14. Sikirica V., Bapat B., Candrilli S.D., Davis K.L., Wilson M., Johns A. (2011) The inpatient burden of abdominal and gynecological adhesiolysis in the US. BMC Surg. 11 (13). DOI: 10.1186/1471-2482-11-13

15. De Wilde R.L., Trew G. (2007). Postoperative abdominal adhesions and their prevention in gynaecological surgery. Expert consensus position. Gynecol Surg, 4 (3), 161-168. DOI: 10.1007/s10397-007-0333-2


Review

For citations:


Bondarevskiy I.Y., Shalmagambetov M.S., Bordunovskiy V.N. The role of polymeric synthetic materials in the development of postoperative adhesion of the peritoneum(experimental study). Acta Biomedica Scientifica. 2018;3(3):181-187. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.29413/ABS.2018-3.3.28

Views: 678


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


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