PURPOSE: Tissue adhesion is a well-known postsurgical phenomenon, causing pain, functional obstruction, and difficult reoperative surgery. To overcome these problems, various synthetic and natural polymer membranes have been developed as postoperative tissue adhesion barriers. However, limitation in their use has hindered its actual application. We prepared a hyaluronate membrane (HM) to evaluate its efficacy and safety as an adhesion barrier compared to a commercialized product (Interceed, Ethicon). METHODS: To evaluate the antiadhesion effect, a cecum-abdominal wall abrasion model was adopted in a rabbit. The denuded cecum was covered by Interceed or HM or neither and apposed to the abdominal wall (each, n = 10). Four weeks after surgery, the level of adhesion was graded. Acute and chronic toxicity of the three groups were also evaluated. RESULTS: Blood samples drawn to evaluate acute toxicity at postoperative day 3 and 7 showed no significant difference among the three groups. The grade and area of adhesion were significantly lower in the HM compared to those of the control and Interceed at four weeks after surgery. Histologic evaluations, which was carried out to estimate tissue reactions at the site of application, as well as to assess chronic toxicity for the major organs, were not significantly different in the three groups. CONCLUSION: This study showed that the antiadhesion efficacy of HM was superior to commercialized antiadhesion membrane, Interceed. Low inflammatory response and nontoxicity were also demonstrated. From these results, we suggest that the HM is a good candidate as a tissue adhesion barrier.
PURPOSE: Tissue adhesion is a well-known postsurgical phenomenon, causing pain, functional obstruction, and difficult reoperative surgery. To overcome these problems, various synthetic and natural polymer membranes have been developed as postoperative tissue adhesion barriers. However, limitation in their use has hindered its actual application. We prepared a hyaluronate membrane (HM) to evaluate its efficacy and safety as an adhesion barrier compared to a commercialized product (Interceed, Ethicon). METHODS: To evaluate the antiadhesion effect, a cecum-abdominal wall abrasion model was adopted in a rabbit. The denuded cecum was covered by Interceed or HM or neither and apposed to the abdominal wall (each, n = 10). Four weeks after surgery, the level of adhesion was graded. Acute and chronic toxicity of the three groups were also evaluated. RESULTS: Blood samples drawn to evaluate acute toxicity at postoperative day 3 and 7 showed no significant difference among the three groups. The grade and area of adhesion were significantly lower in the HM compared to those of the control and Interceed at four weeks after surgery. Histologic evaluations, which was carried out to estimate tissue reactions at the site of application, as well as to assess chronic toxicity for the major organs, were not significantly different in the three groups. CONCLUSION: This study showed that the antiadhesion efficacy of HM was superior to commercialized antiadhesion membrane, Interceed. Low inflammatory response and nontoxicity were also demonstrated. From these results, we suggest that the HM is a good candidate as a tissue adhesion barrier.
Authors: Se Heang Oh; Jin Kyeong Kim; Kyu Sang Song; Seung Moo Noh; Sung Ho Ghil; Soon Hong Yuk; Jin Ho Lee Journal: J Biomed Mater Res A Date: 2005-03-01 Impact factor: 4.396
Authors: Shmuel Avital; Thomas J Bollinger; James D Wilkinson; Floriano Marchetti; Michael D Hellinger; Laurence R Sands Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Chang Hyung Lee; Hongbeom Kim; In Woong Han; Suh Min Kim; Beom Seok Kwak; Yong Hae Baik; Young Jin Park; Min Gu Oh Journal: Ann Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg Date: 2016-11-30