Cargando…

Mechanical Bowel Preparation Does Not Affect Anastomosis Healing in an Experimental Rat Model

BACKGROUND: Mechanical bowel preparation before colorectal surgery is commonly performed, but its benefits are controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of mechanical bowel preparation on healing of colonic anastomosis and tissue strength. MATERIAL/METHODS: After institutional...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Piroglu, Isılay, Tulgar, Serkan, Thomas, David Terence, Cakiroglu, Basri, Piroglu, Mustafa Devrim, Bozkurt, Yasin, Gergerli, Ruken, Ates, Nagihan Gozde
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: International Scientific Literature, Inc. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4706103/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26725402
http://dx.doi.org/10.12659/MSM.895804
_version_ 1782409120851165184
author Piroglu, Isılay
Tulgar, Serkan
Thomas, David Terence
Cakiroglu, Basri
Piroglu, Mustafa Devrim
Bozkurt, Yasin
Gergerli, Ruken
Ates, Nagihan Gozde
author_facet Piroglu, Isılay
Tulgar, Serkan
Thomas, David Terence
Cakiroglu, Basri
Piroglu, Mustafa Devrim
Bozkurt, Yasin
Gergerli, Ruken
Ates, Nagihan Gozde
author_sort Piroglu, Isılay
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Mechanical bowel preparation before colorectal surgery is commonly performed, but its benefits are controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of mechanical bowel preparation on healing of colonic anastomosis and tissue strength. MATERIAL/METHODS: After institutional review board approval, 20 adult Wistar albino rats were randomly divided into 2 groups of 10 animals each. Mechanical bowel preparation including sodium phosphate was performed on the experimental group via a feeding tube, whereas no bowel preparation procedures were performed on the control group. Transverse colon resection and anastomosis were performed on all rats under general anaesthesia. On postoperative day 5, re-laparotomy was performed and the anastomotic areas were resected. Animals were killed, after which bursting pressure and tissue hydroxyproline concentrations were measured, histopathological examination was performed, and we evaluated and compared the results. RESULTS: There were no differences between control and experimental groups in bursting pressure, tissue hydroxyproline concentrations, or histopathological examination results (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated no significant difference between bursting pressures, tissue hydroxyproline levels, or modified wound healing score at postoperative day 5 between rats undergoing and not undergoing mechanical bowel preparation. Mechanical bowel preparation is not essential for healing or strength of colonic anastomosis in rats.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4706103
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher International Scientific Literature, Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47061032016-01-14 Mechanical Bowel Preparation Does Not Affect Anastomosis Healing in an Experimental Rat Model Piroglu, Isılay Tulgar, Serkan Thomas, David Terence Cakiroglu, Basri Piroglu, Mustafa Devrim Bozkurt, Yasin Gergerli, Ruken Ates, Nagihan Gozde Med Sci Monit Animal Study BACKGROUND: Mechanical bowel preparation before colorectal surgery is commonly performed, but its benefits are controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of mechanical bowel preparation on healing of colonic anastomosis and tissue strength. MATERIAL/METHODS: After institutional review board approval, 20 adult Wistar albino rats were randomly divided into 2 groups of 10 animals each. Mechanical bowel preparation including sodium phosphate was performed on the experimental group via a feeding tube, whereas no bowel preparation procedures were performed on the control group. Transverse colon resection and anastomosis were performed on all rats under general anaesthesia. On postoperative day 5, re-laparotomy was performed and the anastomotic areas were resected. Animals were killed, after which bursting pressure and tissue hydroxyproline concentrations were measured, histopathological examination was performed, and we evaluated and compared the results. RESULTS: There were no differences between control and experimental groups in bursting pressure, tissue hydroxyproline concentrations, or histopathological examination results (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated no significant difference between bursting pressures, tissue hydroxyproline levels, or modified wound healing score at postoperative day 5 between rats undergoing and not undergoing mechanical bowel preparation. Mechanical bowel preparation is not essential for healing or strength of colonic anastomosis in rats. International Scientific Literature, Inc. 2016-01-04 /pmc/articles/PMC4706103/ /pubmed/26725402 http://dx.doi.org/10.12659/MSM.895804 Text en © Med Sci Monit, 2016 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License
spellingShingle Animal Study
Piroglu, Isılay
Tulgar, Serkan
Thomas, David Terence
Cakiroglu, Basri
Piroglu, Mustafa Devrim
Bozkurt, Yasin
Gergerli, Ruken
Ates, Nagihan Gozde
Mechanical Bowel Preparation Does Not Affect Anastomosis Healing in an Experimental Rat Model
title Mechanical Bowel Preparation Does Not Affect Anastomosis Healing in an Experimental Rat Model
title_full Mechanical Bowel Preparation Does Not Affect Anastomosis Healing in an Experimental Rat Model
title_fullStr Mechanical Bowel Preparation Does Not Affect Anastomosis Healing in an Experimental Rat Model
title_full_unstemmed Mechanical Bowel Preparation Does Not Affect Anastomosis Healing in an Experimental Rat Model
title_short Mechanical Bowel Preparation Does Not Affect Anastomosis Healing in an Experimental Rat Model
title_sort mechanical bowel preparation does not affect anastomosis healing in an experimental rat model
topic Animal Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4706103/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26725402
http://dx.doi.org/10.12659/MSM.895804
work_keys_str_mv AT pirogluisılay mechanicalbowelpreparationdoesnotaffectanastomosishealinginanexperimentalratmodel
AT tulgarserkan mechanicalbowelpreparationdoesnotaffectanastomosishealinginanexperimentalratmodel
AT thomasdavidterence mechanicalbowelpreparationdoesnotaffectanastomosishealinginanexperimentalratmodel
AT cakiroglubasri mechanicalbowelpreparationdoesnotaffectanastomosishealinginanexperimentalratmodel
AT piroglumustafadevrim mechanicalbowelpreparationdoesnotaffectanastomosishealinginanexperimentalratmodel
AT bozkurtyasin mechanicalbowelpreparationdoesnotaffectanastomosishealinginanexperimentalratmodel
AT gergerliruken mechanicalbowelpreparationdoesnotaffectanastomosishealinginanexperimentalratmodel
AT atesnagihangozde mechanicalbowelpreparationdoesnotaffectanastomosishealinginanexperimentalratmodel