基于孢粉素的材料预防术后粘连:一项小鼠研究。

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Wei Beng Ng, Ian Ee En Sim, Wean Sin Cheow, Young Jun Chai
{"title":"基于孢粉素的材料预防术后粘连:一项小鼠研究。","authors":"Wei Beng Ng, Ian Ee En Sim, Wean Sin Cheow, Young Jun Chai","doi":"10.4174/astr.2025.108.4.256","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study was performed to evaluate the antiadhesive effect and safety of a novel adhesion barrier device (ABD) in comparison to other commercially available anti-adhesion products.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 4-arm, controlled, blinded, experimental, and murine model study design was used. Forty male Sprague Dawley rats were randomly allocated to Interceed, Seprafilm, ABD, and control groups (n = 10/group). Abdominal cavity trauma was induced in all rats. Interceed, Seprafilm, or the ABD were applied to the injury site of each rat according to their respective groups, the control group received no intervention.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-one days after the operation, surgical adhesion severity and area scores were significantly reduced in the Interceed, Seprafilm, and ABD groups compared to the control group (P = 0.016, P < 0.001, P < 0.001, respectively), and in the ABD group compared to the Interceed group (P = 0.036). No significant difference was observed between the ABD and Seprafilm groups (P = 0.070). Additionally, in the ABD group, no remnants of the ABD were observed at the injury site, and no hematological abnormalities were present.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The ABD has the potential to improve postsurgical peritoneal adhesions compared to Interceed and has comparable effectiveness compared to Seprafilm. The ABD may be a valuable option to reduce surgical failure. Further studies in human subjects are warranted to determine the clinical application and safety of the ABD for commercialization.</p>","PeriodicalId":8071,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research","volume":"108 4","pages":"256-269"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11982447/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sporopollenin-based material for prevention of postoperative adhesions: a murine study.\",\"authors\":\"Wei Beng Ng, Ian Ee En Sim, Wean Sin Cheow, Young Jun Chai\",\"doi\":\"10.4174/astr.2025.108.4.256\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study was performed to evaluate the antiadhesive effect and safety of a novel adhesion barrier device (ABD) in comparison to other commercially available anti-adhesion products.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 4-arm, controlled, blinded, experimental, and murine model study design was used. Forty male Sprague Dawley rats were randomly allocated to Interceed, Seprafilm, ABD, and control groups (n = 10/group). Abdominal cavity trauma was induced in all rats. Interceed, Seprafilm, or the ABD were applied to the injury site of each rat according to their respective groups, the control group received no intervention.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-one days after the operation, surgical adhesion severity and area scores were significantly reduced in the Interceed, Seprafilm, and ABD groups compared to the control group (P = 0.016, P < 0.001, P < 0.001, respectively), and in the ABD group compared to the Interceed group (P = 0.036). No significant difference was observed between the ABD and Seprafilm groups (P = 0.070). Additionally, in the ABD group, no remnants of the ABD were observed at the injury site, and no hematological abnormalities were present.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The ABD has the potential to improve postsurgical peritoneal adhesions compared to Interceed and has comparable effectiveness compared to Seprafilm. The ABD may be a valuable option to reduce surgical failure. Further studies in human subjects are warranted to determine the clinical application and safety of the ABD for commercialization.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8071,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research\",\"volume\":\"108 4\",\"pages\":\"256-269\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11982447/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2025.108.4.256\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/31 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2025.108.4.256","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究评估了一种新型粘附屏障装置(ABD)的抗粘附效果和安全性,并与其他市售抗粘附产品进行了比较。方法:采用四臂、对照、盲法、实验和小鼠模型研究设计。选取雄性Sprague Dawley大鼠40只,随机分为Interceed组、Seprafilm组、ABD组和对照组,每组10只。所有大鼠均行腹腔外伤。将Interceed、separfilm或ABD按组分别涂于大鼠损伤部位,对照组不进行干预。结果:术后21 d, Interceed组、Seprafilm组和ABD组手术粘连严重程度和面积评分较对照组显著降低(P = 0.016, P < 0.001, P < 0.001), ABD组较Interceed组显著降低(P = 0.036)。ABD组与sepilfilm组间无显著差异(P = 0.070)。此外,在ABD组中,在损伤部位未观察到ABD的残留物,也未出现血液学异常。结论:与Interceed相比,ABD具有改善术后腹膜粘连的潜力,与sepilfilm相比,ABD的效果相当。ABD可能是减少手术失败的一个有价值的选择。需要进一步的人体研究来确定ABD的临床应用和商业化的安全性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Sporopollenin-based material for prevention of postoperative adhesions: a murine study.

Purpose: This study was performed to evaluate the antiadhesive effect and safety of a novel adhesion barrier device (ABD) in comparison to other commercially available anti-adhesion products.

Methods: A 4-arm, controlled, blinded, experimental, and murine model study design was used. Forty male Sprague Dawley rats were randomly allocated to Interceed, Seprafilm, ABD, and control groups (n = 10/group). Abdominal cavity trauma was induced in all rats. Interceed, Seprafilm, or the ABD were applied to the injury site of each rat according to their respective groups, the control group received no intervention.

Results: Twenty-one days after the operation, surgical adhesion severity and area scores were significantly reduced in the Interceed, Seprafilm, and ABD groups compared to the control group (P = 0.016, P < 0.001, P < 0.001, respectively), and in the ABD group compared to the Interceed group (P = 0.036). No significant difference was observed between the ABD and Seprafilm groups (P = 0.070). Additionally, in the ABD group, no remnants of the ABD were observed at the injury site, and no hematological abnormalities were present.

Conclusion: The ABD has the potential to improve postsurgical peritoneal adhesions compared to Interceed and has comparable effectiveness compared to Seprafilm. The ABD may be a valuable option to reduce surgical failure. Further studies in human subjects are warranted to determine the clinical application and safety of the ABD for commercialization.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.10%
发文量
75
期刊介绍: Manuscripts to the Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research (Ann Surg Treat Res) should be written in English according to the instructions for authors. If the details are not described below, the style should follow the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publications available at International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) website (http://www.icmje.org).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信