Induction and assessment methods used in experimental adhesion studies

Abstract

Infertility and intestinal obstruction are well-known complications, arising from adhesion formation after intra-abdominal operations. Basic principles of adhesion formation have been found through animal studies. In addition, examination of agents for the prevention of adhesions can be easily made using experimental studies. However, lack of uniformity in study design makes assessment of the efficacy of any prophylactic regimen difficult. In this review, the material and methods used in experimental studies designed for adhesion formation or prevention were evaluated in detail, with experimental studies published in the literature from 1960 to 2003 being evaluated. Several methods for adhesion induction have been described in the literature. Severity of the adhesion varies from method to method, with the main problem being the lack of uniform expression of study results. Extensive use of complex adhesion classification systems should be used to resolve this discordance between experimental studies.

Chronological evaluation of inflammatory mediators during peritoneal adhesion formation using a rat model

“…Perioperative and postoperative analgesia was carried out by a single dose of caprofen 5 mg/kg subcutaneously (Rimadyl®, Pfizer AG, Zurich, Switzerland). Adhesion induction was performed under sterile conditions using a standardized cecal abrasion model as previously described [19,29]. To reduce the possible influence of transient ischemia or foreign body related immune response, neither clamping of the arteries supplying the bowel wall or implantation of alloplastic mesh material was performed [16].…”

Barrier methods used to prevent pelvic adhesions in videolaparoscopy: experimental study in female rabbits

“…The model used was peritoneal lesion of the anterior wall, in association with cauterization of the raw area [26][27][28]. Standardized surgery was the resection of a portion of the peritoneum of the anterior abdominal wall above the vesical fold (2 cm) and to the right, measuring 24 9 12 mm, followed by cauterization, with a monopolar electrocautery (30 W power, medium coagulation, 60 W, and intensity 4), using the hook in line and at bleeding points, keeping the surgical field clean and not leaving free clots inside the cavity.…”

Methylene blue 1% solution on the prevention of intraperitoneal adhesion formation in a dog model

“…Thus, barrier methods such as hyaluronate/carboxymethilcellulose (HA/CMC) and polytetrafl uoroethylene (PTFE) biocompatible membranes seems the most rational choice (ARUNG et al, 2011), rather than methylene blue. In a metaanalysis, it was found that low molecular weight intraperitoneal solutions present low effectiveness in comparison to barrier methods, especially in the presence of foreign body (OZEL et al, 2005). The high occurrence of surgical thread-infl icted adhesions highlights that nonabsorbable polyfi lament thread should be avoided for ovariohysterectomies, once complications related to foreign body type reactions and adhesion formation are major concerns (HANDERSON, 1996;COOLMAN et al, 1999).…”

“…Adhesions were induced using a foreign body and partial colonic deserosation model (OZEL et al, 2005). An 8-cm celiotomy was carried out, followed by excision of the falciform ligament and total omentectomy.…”