Cargando…

Evaluation of adhesion barrier types in a rat hepatectomy-induced adhesion model

BACKGROUND: Adhesion formation after hepatectomy creates problems for repeat hepatectomy. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of a spray (AdSpray) and sheet adhesion barrier (Seprafilm) in a rat hepatectomy-induced adhesion model. METHODS: Thirty male Sprague-Dawley rats underwent partial...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shimizu, Atsushi, Kai, Miho, Tasaki, Masako, Chino, Naotaka, Hasegawa, Kiyoshi, Kokudo, Norihiro
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7590730/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33109146
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-020-00877-7
_version_ 1783600862472437760
author Shimizu, Atsushi
Kai, Miho
Tasaki, Masako
Chino, Naotaka
Hasegawa, Kiyoshi
Kokudo, Norihiro
author_facet Shimizu, Atsushi
Kai, Miho
Tasaki, Masako
Chino, Naotaka
Hasegawa, Kiyoshi
Kokudo, Norihiro
author_sort Shimizu, Atsushi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Adhesion formation after hepatectomy creates problems for repeat hepatectomy. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of a spray (AdSpray) and sheet adhesion barrier (Seprafilm) in a rat hepatectomy-induced adhesion model. METHODS: Thirty male Sprague-Dawley rats underwent partial resection of the left lateral liver lobe. They were randomly assigned to control (n = 10), AdSpray (n = 10), and Seprafilm groups. Seven days after surgery, the animals were sacrificed, and adhesions at the hepatic resection surface were blindly evaluated. RESULTS: In the control group, adhesions were formed in all 10 animals (100%), with a 69% adhesion extent (mean). In the AdSpray group, the incidence of adhesions (40%) and the adhesion extent (mean, 10%) were significantly lower than in the control group (incidence; p = 0.0147, adhesion extent; p = 0.0007). In the Seprafilm group, the incidence of adhesions was 70%. The adhesion extent of Seprafilm (mean, 30%) was significantly lower than in the control group (p = 0.0492). No significant differences were observed between the AdSpray and Seprafilm groups. As for histopathological examination, animals in the AdSpray group showed a similar healing profile to that of the control group without delayed healing and regeneration of mesothelial cells. In contrast, the Seprafilm group showed ongoing foreign body reaction to Seprafilm, and regeneration of mesothelial cells was immature at 7 days. CONCLUSIONS: Both the spray-type gel and sheet adhesion barriers significantly reduced adhesion formation after hepatectomy. The spray-type adhesion barrier caused no adverse events and induced favorable healing. These adhesion barriers may be effective in hepatectomy. Further animal studies and clinical trials are required to determine their benefits in clinical use.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7590730
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75907302020-10-27 Evaluation of adhesion barrier types in a rat hepatectomy-induced adhesion model Shimizu, Atsushi Kai, Miho Tasaki, Masako Chino, Naotaka Hasegawa, Kiyoshi Kokudo, Norihiro BMC Surg Research Article BACKGROUND: Adhesion formation after hepatectomy creates problems for repeat hepatectomy. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of a spray (AdSpray) and sheet adhesion barrier (Seprafilm) in a rat hepatectomy-induced adhesion model. METHODS: Thirty male Sprague-Dawley rats underwent partial resection of the left lateral liver lobe. They were randomly assigned to control (n = 10), AdSpray (n = 10), and Seprafilm groups. Seven days after surgery, the animals were sacrificed, and adhesions at the hepatic resection surface were blindly evaluated. RESULTS: In the control group, adhesions were formed in all 10 animals (100%), with a 69% adhesion extent (mean). In the AdSpray group, the incidence of adhesions (40%) and the adhesion extent (mean, 10%) were significantly lower than in the control group (incidence; p = 0.0147, adhesion extent; p = 0.0007). In the Seprafilm group, the incidence of adhesions was 70%. The adhesion extent of Seprafilm (mean, 30%) was significantly lower than in the control group (p = 0.0492). No significant differences were observed between the AdSpray and Seprafilm groups. As for histopathological examination, animals in the AdSpray group showed a similar healing profile to that of the control group without delayed healing and regeneration of mesothelial cells. In contrast, the Seprafilm group showed ongoing foreign body reaction to Seprafilm, and regeneration of mesothelial cells was immature at 7 days. CONCLUSIONS: Both the spray-type gel and sheet adhesion barriers significantly reduced adhesion formation after hepatectomy. The spray-type adhesion barrier caused no adverse events and induced favorable healing. These adhesion barriers may be effective in hepatectomy. Further animal studies and clinical trials are required to determine their benefits in clinical use. BioMed Central 2020-10-27 /pmc/articles/PMC7590730/ /pubmed/33109146 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-020-00877-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Shimizu, Atsushi
Kai, Miho
Tasaki, Masako
Chino, Naotaka
Hasegawa, Kiyoshi
Kokudo, Norihiro
Evaluation of adhesion barrier types in a rat hepatectomy-induced adhesion model
title Evaluation of adhesion barrier types in a rat hepatectomy-induced adhesion model
title_full Evaluation of adhesion barrier types in a rat hepatectomy-induced adhesion model
title_fullStr Evaluation of adhesion barrier types in a rat hepatectomy-induced adhesion model
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of adhesion barrier types in a rat hepatectomy-induced adhesion model
title_short Evaluation of adhesion barrier types in a rat hepatectomy-induced adhesion model
title_sort evaluation of adhesion barrier types in a rat hepatectomy-induced adhesion model
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7590730/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33109146
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-020-00877-7
work_keys_str_mv AT shimizuatsushi evaluationofadhesionbarriertypesinarathepatectomyinducedadhesionmodel
AT kaimiho evaluationofadhesionbarriertypesinarathepatectomyinducedadhesionmodel
AT tasakimasako evaluationofadhesionbarriertypesinarathepatectomyinducedadhesionmodel
AT chinonaotaka evaluationofadhesionbarriertypesinarathepatectomyinducedadhesionmodel
AT hasegawakiyoshi evaluationofadhesionbarriertypesinarathepatectomyinducedadhesionmodel
AT kokudonorihiro evaluationofadhesionbarriertypesinarathepatectomyinducedadhesionmodel