Cargando…
Differences in fluid removal of different open-pore elements for endoscopic negative pressure therapy in the upper gastrointestinal tract
Endoscopic negative pressure therapy is an effective treatment strategy for various defects of the gastrointestinal tract. The functional principle is based on an open-pore element, which is placed around a perforated drainage tube and connected to a vacuum source. The resulting open-pore suction de...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9381550/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35974057 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-17700-3 |
_version_ | 1784769103861383168 |
---|---|
author | Jansen, Kai Tobias Hetzel, Jürgen Schulte, Carola Düzenli, Nurgül Fusco, Stefano Zerabruck, Emanuel Schmider, Eva Malek, Nisar P. Königsrainer, Alfred Stüker, Dietmar Werner, Christoph R. Wichmann, Dörte |
author_facet | Jansen, Kai Tobias Hetzel, Jürgen Schulte, Carola Düzenli, Nurgül Fusco, Stefano Zerabruck, Emanuel Schmider, Eva Malek, Nisar P. Königsrainer, Alfred Stüker, Dietmar Werner, Christoph R. Wichmann, Dörte |
author_sort | Jansen, Kai Tobias |
collection | PubMed |
description | Endoscopic negative pressure therapy is an effective treatment strategy for various defects of the gastrointestinal tract. The functional principle is based on an open-pore element, which is placed around a perforated drainage tube and connected to a vacuum source. The resulting open-pore suction device can undergo endoluminal or intracavitary placement. Different open-pore suction devices are used for endoscopic negative pressure therapy of upper gastrointestinal tract defects. Comparative analyses for features and properties of these devices are still lacking. Eight different (six hand-made devices and two commercial devices) open-pore suction devices for endoscopic negative pressure therapy of the upper gastrointestinal tract were used, amount fluid removed was evaluated. The evaluation parameters included the time to reach the target pressure, the time required to remove 100 ml of water, and the material resistance of the device. All open-pore suction devices are able to aspirate the target volume of fluids. The time to reach the target volume varied considerably. Target negative pressure was not achieved with all open-pore suction devices during the aspiration of fluids; however, there was no negative effect on suction efficiency. Of the measurement data, material resistance could be calculated for six open-pore elements. We present a simple experimental, nonphysiologically setup for open-pore suction devices used for endoscopic negative pressure therapy. The expected quantity of fluids secreted into the treated organs should affect open-pore suction device for endoscopic negative pressure therapy. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9381550 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93815502022-08-18 Differences in fluid removal of different open-pore elements for endoscopic negative pressure therapy in the upper gastrointestinal tract Jansen, Kai Tobias Hetzel, Jürgen Schulte, Carola Düzenli, Nurgül Fusco, Stefano Zerabruck, Emanuel Schmider, Eva Malek, Nisar P. Königsrainer, Alfred Stüker, Dietmar Werner, Christoph R. Wichmann, Dörte Sci Rep Article Endoscopic negative pressure therapy is an effective treatment strategy for various defects of the gastrointestinal tract. The functional principle is based on an open-pore element, which is placed around a perforated drainage tube and connected to a vacuum source. The resulting open-pore suction device can undergo endoluminal or intracavitary placement. Different open-pore suction devices are used for endoscopic negative pressure therapy of upper gastrointestinal tract defects. Comparative analyses for features and properties of these devices are still lacking. Eight different (six hand-made devices and two commercial devices) open-pore suction devices for endoscopic negative pressure therapy of the upper gastrointestinal tract were used, amount fluid removed was evaluated. The evaluation parameters included the time to reach the target pressure, the time required to remove 100 ml of water, and the material resistance of the device. All open-pore suction devices are able to aspirate the target volume of fluids. The time to reach the target volume varied considerably. Target negative pressure was not achieved with all open-pore suction devices during the aspiration of fluids; however, there was no negative effect on suction efficiency. Of the measurement data, material resistance could be calculated for six open-pore elements. We present a simple experimental, nonphysiologically setup for open-pore suction devices used for endoscopic negative pressure therapy. The expected quantity of fluids secreted into the treated organs should affect open-pore suction device for endoscopic negative pressure therapy. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-08-16 /pmc/articles/PMC9381550/ /pubmed/35974057 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-17700-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This 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/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Jansen, Kai Tobias Hetzel, Jürgen Schulte, Carola Düzenli, Nurgül Fusco, Stefano Zerabruck, Emanuel Schmider, Eva Malek, Nisar P. Königsrainer, Alfred Stüker, Dietmar Werner, Christoph R. Wichmann, Dörte Differences in fluid removal of different open-pore elements for endoscopic negative pressure therapy in the upper gastrointestinal tract |
title | Differences in fluid removal of different open-pore elements for endoscopic negative pressure therapy in the upper gastrointestinal tract |
title_full | Differences in fluid removal of different open-pore elements for endoscopic negative pressure therapy in the upper gastrointestinal tract |
title_fullStr | Differences in fluid removal of different open-pore elements for endoscopic negative pressure therapy in the upper gastrointestinal tract |
title_full_unstemmed | Differences in fluid removal of different open-pore elements for endoscopic negative pressure therapy in the upper gastrointestinal tract |
title_short | Differences in fluid removal of different open-pore elements for endoscopic negative pressure therapy in the upper gastrointestinal tract |
title_sort | differences in fluid removal of different open-pore elements for endoscopic negative pressure therapy in the upper gastrointestinal tract |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9381550/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35974057 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-17700-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jansenkaitobias differencesinfluidremovalofdifferentopenporeelementsforendoscopicnegativepressuretherapyintheuppergastrointestinaltract AT hetzeljurgen differencesinfluidremovalofdifferentopenporeelementsforendoscopicnegativepressuretherapyintheuppergastrointestinaltract AT schultecarola differencesinfluidremovalofdifferentopenporeelementsforendoscopicnegativepressuretherapyintheuppergastrointestinaltract AT duzenlinurgul differencesinfluidremovalofdifferentopenporeelementsforendoscopicnegativepressuretherapyintheuppergastrointestinaltract AT fuscostefano differencesinfluidremovalofdifferentopenporeelementsforendoscopicnegativepressuretherapyintheuppergastrointestinaltract AT zerabruckemanuel differencesinfluidremovalofdifferentopenporeelementsforendoscopicnegativepressuretherapyintheuppergastrointestinaltract AT schmidereva differencesinfluidremovalofdifferentopenporeelementsforendoscopicnegativepressuretherapyintheuppergastrointestinaltract AT maleknisarp differencesinfluidremovalofdifferentopenporeelementsforendoscopicnegativepressuretherapyintheuppergastrointestinaltract AT konigsraineralfred differencesinfluidremovalofdifferentopenporeelementsforendoscopicnegativepressuretherapyintheuppergastrointestinaltract AT stukerdietmar differencesinfluidremovalofdifferentopenporeelementsforendoscopicnegativepressuretherapyintheuppergastrointestinaltract AT wernerchristophr differencesinfluidremovalofdifferentopenporeelementsforendoscopicnegativepressuretherapyintheuppergastrointestinaltract AT wichmanndorte differencesinfluidremovalofdifferentopenporeelementsforendoscopicnegativepressuretherapyintheuppergastrointestinaltract |