Objective To estimate the disease burden of the most important complications of postoperative abdominal adhesions: small bowel obstruction, difficulties at reoperation, infertility, and chronic pain.Design Systematic review and meta-analyses.Data sources Searches of PubMed, Embase, and Central, from January 1990 to December 2012, without restrictions to publication status or language.Study selection All types of studies reporting on the incidence of adhesion related complications were considered.Data extraction and analysis The primary outcome was the incidence of adhesive small bowel obstruction in patients with a history of abdominal surgery. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of small bowel obstruction by any cause, difference in operative time, enterotomy during adhesiolysis, and pregnancy rate after abdominal surgery. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were done to study the robustness of the results. A random effects model was used to account for heterogeneity between studies.Results We identified 196 eligible papers. Heterogeneity was considerable for almost all meta-analyses. The origin of heterogeneity could not be explained by study design, study quality, publication date, anatomical site of operation, or operative technique. The incidence of small bowel obstruction by any cause after abdominal surgery was 9% (95% confidence interval 7% to 10%; I 2 =99%). the incidence of adhesive small bowel obstruction was 2% (2% to 3%; I 2 =93%); presence of adhesions was generally confirmed by emergent reoperation. In patients with a known cause of small bowel obstruction, adhesions were the single most common cause (56%, 49% to 64%; I 2 =96%). Operative time was prolonged by 15 minutes (95% confidence interval 9.3 to 21.1 minutes; I 2 =85%) in patients with previous surgery. Use of adhesiolysis resulted in a 6% (4% to 8%; I 2 =89%) incidence of iatrogenic bowel injury. The pregnancy rate after colorectal surgery in patients with inflammatory bowel disease was 50% (37% to 63%; I 2 =94%), which was significantly lower than the pregnancy rate in medically treated patients (82%, 70% to 94%; I 2 =97%).Conclusions This review provides detailed and systematically analysed knowledge of the disease burden of adhesions. Complications of postoperative adhesion formation are frequent, have a large negative effect on patients' health, and increase workload in clinical practice. The quantitative effects should be interpreted with caution owing to large heterogeneity.
Postsurgical adhesion formation is a significant clinical problem within every surgical specialism. Due to the problems that adhesions cause, a wide variety of adjunctive treatments to prevent the formation and reformation of adhesions have been proposed. One of the modalities that has been studied extensively and that has been showing the most promising results is the so-called barrier method. The purpose of the present study was to compare the efficacy of five of these barrier materials in the prevention of postsurgical adhesion formation in a standardized rat adhesion model. It was concluded that no beneficial effect of Ringer's lactate on adhesion formation was seen. Significant reductions (P < 0.0001) in adhesion percentages compared to control animals were seen with Polyactive((TM)), PRECLUDE Peritoneal Membrane((TM)), Seprafilm((TM)) and Tissucol((TM)), but only PRECLUDE Peritoneal Membrane and Seprafilm significantly reduced adhesions (P < 0.01) when the barrier-treated peritoneal defects were compared with contralateral control-side peritoneal defects. The results of our study suggest that Seprafilm and PRECLUDE Peritoneal Membrane are superior to Tissucol and Polyactive in preventing adhesion formation. When Polyactive was still attached to the site of application during the second laparotomy, similar results to Seprafilm and PRECLUDE Peritoneal Membrane were seen. Future studies on the efficacy of a material to decrease adhesion formation should always include a comparison of several control materials in the same model. Our study indicates that Seprafilm or PRECLUDE Peritoneal Membrane might be used as standards of control.
INTRODUCTION Adhesion formation is the most common complication following peritoneal surgery and the leading cause of small bowel obstruction, acquired infertility and inadvertent organ injury at reoperation. Using a 'good surgical technique' is advocated as a first step in preventing adhesions. However, the evidence for different surgical techniques to reduce adhesion formation needs confirmation. METHODS Pubmed, Embase and CENTRAL were searched to identify randomized controlled trials that investigated the effect of various aspects of surgical technique on adhesion-related outcomes. Clinical outcomes and incidence of adhesions were the primary endpoints. Identification of papers and data extraction were performed by two independent researchers. RESULTS There were 28 papers with 27 studies included for a systematic review. Of these, 17 studies were eligible for meta-analysis and 11 for qualitative assessment only. None of the techniques that were compared significantly reduced the incidence of adhesive small bowel obstruction. In a small low-quality trial, the pregnancy rate increased after subserous fixation of suture knots. However, the incidence of adhesions was lower after laparoscopic compared with open surgery [relative risk (RR) 0.14; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.03-0.61] and when the peritoneum was not closed (RR 0.36; 95% CI: 0.21-0.63). CONCLUSIONS None of the specific techniques that were compared reduced the two main adhesion-related clinical outcomes, small bowel obstruction and infertility. The meta-analysis provides little evidence for the surgical principle that using less invasive techniques, introducing less foreign bodies or causing less ischaemia reduces the extent and severity of adhesions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.