| Literature DB >> 36177054 |
Oguz Kayiran1, Suphan Tunc2, Guler Gamze Eren Ozcan2, Neslihan Kaya3, Derya Karabulut4.
Abstract
Background: Scarless healing comprises the ultimate goal after an injury. Since tendon healing results in a fibrotic scar, an injured tendon can never regain the mechanical potential and strength of its uninjured form. A wide variety of studies focus on the tendon healing with an absent or minimal peritendinous adhesions. However, no simple method has managed it at all. Possible complex actions and peritendinous environmental events take place during the tendon healing process. Tamoxifen (TAM), besides its breast cancer-related usage, is a potent antifibrotic drug. Here, we aimed to reduce the peritendinous adhesion with TAM administration.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36177054 PMCID: PMC9514950 DOI: 10.1155/2022/4250771
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.246
Figure 1(a) Isolation of Achilles tendon. (b) Division of Achilles tendon. (c) Repair of Achilles tendon with nonabsorbable suture material (polypropylene).
Macroscopic grading system for adhesions according to Tang et al. [32].
| Points | Features of adhesions |
|---|---|
| Length (quantity) | |
| 0 | No adhesions |
| 1 | <5 mm |
| 2 | 5 to 10 mm |
| 3 | >10 mm |
| Density and tolerance for mobility (quality) | |
| 0 | No adhesions |
| 1 | Loose, elastic, and mobile |
| 2 | Moderate mobility |
| 3 | Rigid, dense, and immobile |
| Grading of adhesions | |
| 0 | Absent |
| 1, 2 | Slight |
| 3, 4 | Moderate |
| 5, 6 | Severe |
The grading criteria of adhesions in histologic evaluation according to Tang et al. [32].
| Points | Features of adhesions |
|---|---|
| Quantity | |
| 0 | No apparent adhesions |
| 1 | A number of scattered filaments |
| 2 | A large number of filaments |
| 3 | Countless filaments |
| Quality | |
| 0 | No apparent adhesions |
| 1 | Regular, elongated, fine, and filamentous |
| 2 | Irregular, mixed, shortened, and filamentous |
| 3 | Dense, filamentous |
| Grading of adhesions | |
| 0 | No adhesions |
| 1, 2 | Slight adhesions |
| 3, 4 | Moderate adhesions |
| 5, 6 | Severe adhesions |
Figure 2Tendon sample placed between jaws of tensile appliance during tendon tensile test. (a) Front view. (b) Side view.
Macroscopical, histopathological, and adhesion mean scores among the groups. Please notice that similar findings are observed between group 2 and group 3. Group 4 shows reduced scores compared with the other groups. The generated peritendinous habitual reaction to trauma is profoundly less in group 4 when compared to G1CON (macro: macroscopical; micro: microscopical-histopathological; G1CON: group 1 control; G1SHAM: group 1 sham).
| G1CON | G1SHAM | Group 2 | Group 3 | Group 4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| macro1 (quantity) | 1.54 | 0.00 | 2.18 | 1.63 | 0.91 |
| macro2 (quality) | 1.72 | 0.00 | 1.81 | 2.09 | 1.27 |
| macro3 (adhesion) | 2.00 | 0.00 | 3.27 | 3.63 | 1.27 |
| micro1 (quantity) | 1.81 | 0.00 | 2.27 | 2.09 | 1.18 |
| micro2 (quality) | 1.90 | 0.00 | 2.09 | 2.09 | 1.18 |
| micro3 (adhesion) | 2.73 | 0.00 | 3.27 | 3.90 | 1.36 |
Macroscopic evaluation of adhesion scores among the groups. Distribution of the animals regarding their adhesion scores. You can notice that slight adhesion was established in group 4 which is similar with the control group. On the contrary, groups 2 and 3 have adhesions ranged between slight and severe (G1CON: group 1 control; G1SHAM: group 1 sham).
| No adhesion | Slight adhesion | Moderate adhesion | Severe adhesion | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| G1CON | 9 (82%) | 2 (18%) | ||
| G1SHAM | 11 (100%) | |||
| Group 2 | 4 (36%) | 5 (45%) | 2 (19%) | |
| Group 3 | 2 (18%) | 7 (64%) | 2 (18%) | |
| Group 4 | 1 (9%) | 10 (91%) |
Figure 3Histopathological findings. (a) A number of scattered filaments, irregular and shortened slight adhesions (G1CON). (b) A large number of filaments, shortened, filamentous with slight adhesions (G1CON). (c) Countless, dense filaments with severe adhesions (group 2). (d) Regular, fine number of scattered filaments and slight adhesions (group 3). (e) A large number of filaments, shortened, filamentous appearance with moderate adhesions (group 3). (f) A large number of dense filaments with severe adhesions (group 3). (g) A number of scattered filaments, regular, elongated appearance with slight adhesions (group 4). (h) A large number of filaments, mixed, shortened, filamentous appearance with slight adhesions (group 4). (i) Fibroblastic activity in Masson's trichrome staining showing scattered filaments (G1CON). (j) Fibroblastic activity in Masson's trichrome staining showing dense filaments (group 2). (k) Fibroblastic activity in Masson's trichrome staining showing moderate adhesions (group 3). (l) Fibroblastic activity in Masson's trichrome staining with slight adhesions (group 4). (m) Please notice the mean loss of elastic fibers in Masson's trichrome staining (group 4). Upper two rows are stained in hematoxylin and eosin.
Figure 4Mean maximum rupture force values obtained during tensile test on tendons. Groups with significant difference ∗p < 0.01.
p values were calculated between the groups with the same parameters. Bold ones show the statistically significant values. Please note p below 0.05 was established between G1CON and G1SHAM in each parameter. Moreover, most of the parameters between G1CON and group 4 showed p below 0.05. This table summarizes the statistics of Figure 4 (G1CON: group 1 control; G1SHAM: group 1 sham).
| Groups |
|
|---|---|
| G1CONmacro1 - G1SHAMmacro1 |
|
| G1CONmacro2 - G1SHAMmacro2 |
|
| G1CONmacro3 - G1SHAMmacro3 |
|
| G1CONmicro1 - G1SHAMmicro1 |
|
| G1CONmicro2 - G1SHAMmicro2 |
|
| G1CONmicro3 - G1SHAMmicro3 |
|
| G1CONmacro1 - G2macro1 |
|
| G1CONmacro2 - G2macro2 | .724 |
| G1CONmacro3 - G2macro3 |
|
| G1CONmicro1 - G2micro1 | .096 |
| G1CONmicro2 - G2micro2 | .506 |
| G1CONmicro3 - G2micro3 | .237 |
| G1CONmacro1 - G3macro1 | .676 |
| G1CONmacro2 - G3macro2 |
|
| G1CONmacro3 - G3macro3 |
|
| G1CONmicro1 - G3micro1 | .082 |
| G1CONmicro2 - G3micro2 | .341 |
| G1CONmicro3 - G3micro3 |
|
| G1CONmacro1 - G4macro1 | .067 |
| G1CONmacro2 - G4macro2 | .096 |
| G1CONmacro3 - G4macro3 |
|
| G1CONmicro1 - G4micro1 |
|
| G1CONmicro2 - G4micro2 |
|
| G1CONmicro3 - G4micro3 |
|
| G2macro1 - G3macro1 | .052 |
| G2macro2 - G3macro2 | .277 |
| G2macro3 - G3macro3 | .397 |
| G2micro1 - G3micro1 | .441 |
| G2micro2 - G3micro2 | 1.000 |
| G2micro3 - G3micro3 | .152 |
| G2macro1 - G4macro1 |
|
| G2macro2 - G4macro2 | .052 |
| G2macro3 - G4macro3 |
|
| G2micro1 - G4micro1 |
|
| G2micro2 - G4micro2 |
|
| G2micro3 - G4micro3 |
|
| G3macro1 - G4macro1 |
|
| G3macro2 - G4macro2 |
|
| G3macro3 - G4macro3 |
|
| G3micro1 - G4micro1 |
|
| G3micro2 - G4micro2 |
|
| G3micro3 - G4micro3 |
|
Figure 5Pathological findings revealed statistically significance between the groups with the brackets. The values in y-axis indicate mean measurements. Moreover, the significant values are summarized in the table at the right bottom side (CON: control; G1: group 1; G2: group 2; G3: group 3; G4: group 4; macro1: macroscopic finding quantity segment; macro2: macroscopic finding quality segment; macro3: macroscopic finding grading of adhesion segment; micro1: histopathological finding quantity segment; micro2: histopathological finding quality segment; micro3: histopathological finding grading of adhesion segment). Here, you will find the relevant statistical significance among the groups with the identical color in brackets (green: macro1; red: macro2; grey: macro3; yellow: micro1; blue: micro2; purple: micro3).