4.7 Article

Role of the peritoneal cavity in the prevention of postoperative adhesions, pain, and fatigue

期刊

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
卷 106, 期 5, 页码 998-1010

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.08.012

关键词

Surgery; adhesion prevention; peritoneum; conditioning; endometriosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A surgical trauma results within minutes in exudation, platelets, and fibrin deposition. Within hours, the denuded area is covered by tissue repair cells/macrophages, starting a cascade of events. Epithelial repair starts on day 1 and is terminated by day 3. If repair is delayed by decreased fibrinolysis, local inflammation, or factors in peritoneal fluid, fibroblast growth starting on day 3 and angiogenesis starting on day 5 results in adhesion formation. For adhesion formation, quantitatively more important are factors released into the peritoneal fluid after retraction of the fragile mesothelial cells and acute inflammation of the entire peritoneal cavity. This is caused by mechanical trauma, hypoxia (e.g., CO2 pneumoperitoneum), reactive oxygen species (ROS; e.g., open surgery), desiccation, or presence of blood, and this is more severe at higher temperatures. The inflammation at trauma sites is delayed by necrotic tissue, resorbable sutures, vascularization damage, and oxidative stress. Prevention of adhesion formation therefore consists of the prevention of acute inflammation in the peritoneal cavity by means of gentle tissue handling, the addition of more than 5% N2O to the CO2 pneumoperitoneum, cooling the abdomen to 30 degrees C, prevention of desiccation, a short duration of surgery, and, at the end of surgery, meticulous hemostasis, thorough lavage, application of a barrier to injury sites, and administration of dexamethasone. With this combined therapy, nearly adhesion-free surgery can be performed today. Conditioning alone results in some 85% adhesion prevention, barriers alone in 40%-50%. (C) 2016 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据