BACKGROUND: Commercially available agents for adhesion prophylaxis are legion but there is a lack of direct comparisons between them. Here we compare four of the most commonly used adhesion barriers against a control group in a clinically relevant rat model. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Standardized lesions were created in Wistar rats using electrocautery and suturing. Subsequently, the experimental lesions were treated with Seprafilm (n = 30), Adept (n = 30), Intercoat (n = 30), Spraygel (n = 30), or no barrier (n = 30). The resulting adhesions were examined 14 d postoperatively. RESULTS: The mean area covered by adhesion was 77% in the control group, 46% in animals treated with Seprafilm, 54% in animals treated with Adept, 55% in animals treated with Intercoat, and 68% in animals treated with Spraygel. The adhesion-free incidence was 20% (n = 6) of lesions treated with Seprafilm, 20% (n = 6) of lesions treated with Intercoat, 3% of lesions treated with Spraygel (n = 1), and 0% of lesions treated with Adept or the control group. CONCLUSIONS: There were statistically significant differences between the barriers with regards to the area covered by adhesions and the adhesion-free incidence. In spite of this, a significant adhesion burden remains with all of the tested barriers. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: Commercially available agents for adhesion prophylaxis are legion but there is a lack of direct comparisons between them. Here we compare four of the most commonly used adhesion barriers against a control group in a clinically relevant rat model. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Standardized lesions were created in Wistar rats using electrocautery and suturing. Subsequently, the experimental lesions were treated with Seprafilm (n = 30), Adept (n = 30), Intercoat (n = 30), Spraygel (n = 30), or no barrier (n = 30). The resulting adhesions were examined 14 d postoperatively. RESULTS: The mean area covered by adhesion was 77% in the control group, 46% in animals treated with Seprafilm, 54% in animals treated with Adept, 55% in animals treated with Intercoat, and 68% in animals treated with Spraygel. The adhesion-free incidence was 20% (n = 6) of lesions treated with Seprafilm, 20% (n = 6) of lesions treated with Intercoat, 3% of lesions treated with Spraygel (n = 1), and 0% of lesions treated with Adept or the control group. CONCLUSIONS: There were statistically significant differences between the barriers with regards to the area covered by adhesions and the adhesion-free incidence. In spite of this, a significant adhesion burden remains with all of the tested barriers. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Christoph Brochhausen; Volker H Schmitt; Constanze N E Planck; Taufiek K Rajab; David Hollemann; Christine Tapprich; Bernhard Krämer; Christian Wallwiener; Helmut Hierlemann; Rolf Zehbe; Heinrich Planck; C James Kirkpatrick Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Christoph Brochhausen; Volker H Schmitt; Taufiek K Rajab; Constanze N E Planck; Bernhard Krämer; Christine Tapprich; Markus Wallwiener; Helmut Hierlemann; Heinrich Planck; C James Kirkpatrick Journal: J Mater Sci Mater Med Date: 2012-05-10 Impact factor: 3.896
Authors: Jan Bosteels; Steven Weyers; Thomas M D'Hooghe; Helen Torrance; Frank J Broekmans; Su Jen Chua; Ben Willem J Mol Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-11-27
Authors: Anja Hirschelmann; Garri Tchartchian; Markus Wallwiener; Andreas Hackethal; Rudy Leon De Wilde Journal: Arch Gynecol Obstet Date: 2011-10-30 Impact factor: 2.344
Authors: Bernhard Kraemer; Christian Wallwiener; Taufiek K Rajab; Christoph Brochhausen; Markus Wallwiener; Ralf Rothmund Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2014-04-08 Impact factor: 3.411