Comparison of cecal abrasion and multiple-abrasion models in generating intra-abdominal adhesions for animal studies.
Comparison of cecal abrasion and multiple-abrasion models in generating intra-abdominal adhesions for animal studies.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s10151-005-0189-2
复制
发表时间：
2005-04-01
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Fazio, V W
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Oncel, M;Remzi, F H;Fazio, V W
背景：术后粘连的形成是腹部手术中常见的问题，可导致严重的并发症。合适的动物粘连模型对于研究粘连形成和开发新的抗粘连产品至关重要。虽然已经开发了动物模型来研究腹部粘连形成的过程，但是它们不能有效地在临床实践中最常观察到粘连的小肠上产生粘连。方法：对29只Sprague道利大鼠进行标准化盲肠磨损（1组，n=9），或两种类型的多处擦伤，其中盲肠和小肠上进行3或5处擦伤（2组，n=10;和3组，n=10）。一个观察员不知情的随机化评估粘连松解术的难度在6点量表，并记录21天后，首次surgery.RESULTS：粘连松解术的位置是显着更困难的第3组比第1组（p=0.01）。第2组和第3组小肠段之间粘连的动物数量和小肠粘连的总位置数量显著高于第1组（p
BACKGROUND: The formation of postoperative adhesions is a common problem in abdominal surgery that may lead to serious complications. Appropriate animal adhesion models are essential for the investigation of adhesiogenesis and the development of new anti-adhesive products. Although animal models have been developed to study the process of adhesion formation in the abdomen, they are not effective in generating adhesions located over small bowel where adhesions are most commonly observed in clinical practice.METHODS: Twenty-nine Sprague Dawley rats were subjected to standardized cecal abrasion (group 1; n=9), or two types of multiple abrasion, in which cecal and 3 or 5 abrasions were performed on small bowel (group 2, n=10; and group 3, n=10). An observer blinded to the randomization assessed the difficulty of adhesiolysis on a 6-point scale, and the locations of the adhesions were recorded 21 days after the initial surgery.RESULTS: Adhesiolysis was significantly more difficult in group 3 than in group 1 (p=0.01). The number of animals that had adhesions between the small bowel segments and the total number of locations where small bowel adhered were significantly greater in group 2 and 3 than in group 1 (p