International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2008
Polypropylene mesh covered colonic anastomosis. Results of a new anastomosis technique.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Aysan Erhan, Dincel Oguzhan, Bektas Hasan, Alkan Murat
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The morbidity and mortality rates of anastomosis leakage of the gastrointestinal system, are high. In this study we covered the colonic anastomosis with polypropylene mesh on the safety of the anastomosis was investigated.
METHODS: Twenty female albino rabbits were divided into two groups. First of all, a segmental colon resection was performed in both the groups and a single layer of anastomosis was made. In addition, a polypropylene mesh as long as the circumference of the anastomosis in the study group. All the rabbits were sacrificed on the 10th postoperative day and the explosion pressure of the anastomosis, histopathological investigation of the anastomotic contour, and peritoneal adhesion were compared.
RESULTS: The anastomoses of all the subjects in the control group had exploded and the average explosion pressure was 149 +/- 16 mmHg. However, in the study group, the anastomoses did not explode in nine (90%) of the subjects, whereas it exploded in only one (10%) with a pressure of 260 mmHg. The average explosion pressure in the study group was 315 +/- 30 mmHg (p < 0.0001). No significant difference was established between the groups according to the histopathological classification of the anastomotic contour performed according to the Ehrlich-Hunt model (p > 0.05). Peritoneal adhesions of the groups is not statistically different (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: During the short follow-up period, this new technique significantly increased the safety of the anastomosis, moreover it did not cause any increase in peritoneal adhesions. This success has most probably occurred as a result of the external mechanical support to the anastomosis.
METHODS: Twenty female albino rabbits were divided into two groups. First of all, a segmental colon resection was performed in both the groups and a single layer of anastomosis was made. In addition, a polypropylene mesh as long as the circumference of the anastomosis in the study group. All the rabbits were sacrificed on the 10th postoperative day and the explosion pressure of the anastomosis, histopathological investigation of the anastomotic contour, and peritoneal adhesion were compared.
RESULTS: The anastomoses of all the subjects in the control group had exploded and the average explosion pressure was 149 +/- 16 mmHg. However, in the study group, the anastomoses did not explode in nine (90%) of the subjects, whereas it exploded in only one (10%) with a pressure of 260 mmHg. The average explosion pressure in the study group was 315 +/- 30 mmHg (p < 0.0001). No significant difference was established between the groups according to the histopathological classification of the anastomotic contour performed according to the Ehrlich-Hunt model (p > 0.05). Peritoneal adhesions of the groups is not statistically different (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: During the short follow-up period, this new technique significantly increased the safety of the anastomosis, moreover it did not cause any increase in peritoneal adhesions. This success has most probably occurred as a result of the external mechanical support to the anastomosis.