Int J Med Sci 2016; 13(7):524-532. doi:10.7150/ijms.15167 This issue Cite

Research Paper

Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Peritoneal Adhesion Prevention Devices in a Rat Model

D Poehnert1, L Grethe1, L Maegel2, D Jonigk2, T Lippmann2, A Kaltenborn3,4, H Schrem1,3, J Klempnauer1, M Winny1✉

1. Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Hannover Medical School, Germany;
2. Institute of Pathology, Hannover Medical School, Germany;
3. Core Facility Quality Management and Health Technology Assessment in Transplantation, Integrated Research and Treatment Center-Transplantation (IFB-Tx), Hannover Medical School, Germany;
4. Department of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, Federal Armed Forces Hospital Westerstede, Westerstede, Germany.

Citation:
Poehnert D, Grethe L, Maegel L, Jonigk D, Lippmann T, Kaltenborn A, Schrem H, Klempnauer J, Winny M. Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Peritoneal Adhesion Prevention Devices in a Rat Model. Int J Med Sci 2016; 13(7):524-532. doi:10.7150/ijms.15167. https://www.medsci.org/v13p0524.htm
Other styles

File import instruction

Abstract

Background: Abdominal operations are followed by adhesions, a prevalent cause of abdominal pain, and the most frequent cause for bowel obstruction and secondary female infertility. This rat study addresses adhesion prevention capability of Adept®, Interceed®, Seprafilm®, and a novel device, 4DryField® PH which is provided as powder and generates its effect as gel.

Methods: Sixty-eight male Lewis rats had cecal abrasion and creation of an equally sized abdominal wall defect, and were grouped randomly: A control group without treatment (n=10); two groups treated with 4DryField® PH using premixed gel (n=15) or in-situ gel technique (n=16); one group each was treated with Seprafilm® (n=8), Interceed® (n=9), or Adept® (n=10). Sacrifice was on day 7 to evaluate incidence, quality, and quantity of adhesions, as expressed via adhesion reduction rate (AR). Histologic specimens were evaluated. Statistical analyses used ANOVA and unpaired t-tests.

Results: 4DryField® PH significantly reduced incidence and severity of adhesions both as premixed gel (AR: 85.2%) and as in-situ made gel (AR: 100%), a comparison between these two application techniques showed no differences in efficacy. Seprafilm® did not reduce incidence but severity of adhesions significantly (AR: 53.5%). With Interceed® (AR: 3.7%) and Adept® (AR: 16.1%) no significant adhesion-reduction was achieved. Except for inflammatory response with Interceed®, histopathology showed good tissue compatibility of all other devices.

Conclusion: 4DryField® PH and Seprafilm® showed significant adhesion prevention capabilities. 4DryField® PH achieved the highest adhesion prevention effectiveness without restrictions concerning mode of application and compatibility and, thus, is a promising strategy to prevent abdominal adhesions.

Keywords: Adhesion prevention, abdominal surgery, rat model OPAM, 4DryField® PH, Adept®, Interceed®, Seprafilm®


Citation styles

APA
Poehnert, D., Grethe, L., Maegel, L., Jonigk, D., Lippmann, T., Kaltenborn, A., Schrem, H., Klempnauer, J., Winny, M. (2016). Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Peritoneal Adhesion Prevention Devices in a Rat Model. International Journal of Medical Sciences, 13(7), 524-532. https://doi.org/10.7150/ijms.15167.

ACS
Poehnert, D.; Grethe, L.; Maegel, L.; Jonigk, D.; Lippmann, T.; Kaltenborn, A.; Schrem, H.; Klempnauer, J.; Winny, M. Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Peritoneal Adhesion Prevention Devices in a Rat Model. Int. J. Med. Sci. 2016, 13 (7), 524-532. DOI: 10.7150/ijms.15167.

NLM
Poehnert D, Grethe L, Maegel L, Jonigk D, Lippmann T, Kaltenborn A, Schrem H, Klempnauer J, Winny M. Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Peritoneal Adhesion Prevention Devices in a Rat Model. Int J Med Sci 2016; 13(7):524-532. doi:10.7150/ijms.15167. https://www.medsci.org/v13p0524.htm

CSE
Poehnert D, Grethe L, Maegel L, Jonigk D, Lippmann T, Kaltenborn A, Schrem H, Klempnauer J, Winny M. 2016. Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Peritoneal Adhesion Prevention Devices in a Rat Model. Int J Med Sci. 13(7):524-532.

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-NC) License. See http://ivyspring.com/terms for full terms and conditions.
Popup Image