Chimiohyperthermie intrapéritonéale: évaluation, prévention et gestion des risques professionnels au bloc opératoire

Simón, Lucía; Mc, Halilou; Gladieff, L.; M, Gadiou; Hérin, Fabrice; Hennebelle, Isabelle; Chatelut, Étienne; Ferron, G

doi:10.1684/bdc.2009.0927

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Third, we gently massaged the abdominal wall during the perfusion, which made the distribution of the perfusion fluid and heat conduction equal. Fourth, operator exposure to chemotherapeutic agents and environmental pollution must be considered with the open technique [36]. Fifth, the time of general anesthesia is extended for the open technique, which may increase the risk of the associated surgery.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safe temperature range for intraoperative and early postoperative continuous hyperthermic intraperitoneal perfusion in a swine model of experimental distal gastrectomy with Billroth II reconstruction

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe current study sought to investigate the safety of intraoperative and early postoperative continuous hyperthermic intraperitoneal perfusion (IEPCHIP) at different temperatures in a swine model of experimental distal gastrectomy with Billroth II reconstruction.MethodsThirty pigs were randomly divided into 5 groups. Two groups were used as the control groups (groups A1 and A2), and 3 groups were used as the perfusion groups (groups B, C and D). Pigs in group A1 received distal gastrectomy with Billroth II reconstruction only. Pigs in groups A2, B, C and D received the same surgery as group A1, followed by IEPCHIP at 37 ± 0.5°C, 42.5 ± 0.5°C, 43.5 ± 0.5°C or 44.5 ± 0.5°C, respectively. The perfusion time was assessed for each pig in group A2 as well as in the perfusion groups, and the perfusions were performed twice for each group. The first perfusion was conducted intraoperatively, and the second perfusion was initiated 1 day after surgery. Data concerning vital signs and hepatic and renal function were collected. Parameters concerning anastomotic healing, the pathology of the anastomotic tissue and abdominal adhesion were compared.ResultsThe vital signs and hepatic and renal functions of the pigs in groups A1, A2, B and C were not significantly affected by this procedure. In contrast, the vital signs and hepatic and renal functions of the pigs in group D were significantly affected. Compared to the pigs in groups A1, A2 or B, the anastomotic bursting pressure, breaking strength and hydroxyproline content in group C and D pigs were significantly lower. No significant differences were observed in these parameters between groups A1, A2 and B. Abdominal adhesion was more severe in group D pigs. Collagen deposition in group A1, A2 and B pigs was dense in the anastomosis, and inflammatory cell infiltration was observed in group D.ConclusionsIEPCHIP at 42.5 ± 0.5°C was safe and caused minimal impairments. However, anastomotic healing was affected by perfusion at 43.5 ± 0.5°C and 44.5 ± 0.5°C, and abdominal adhesion was most severe in the group D animals, which were perfused at 44.5 ± 0.5°C.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%