Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://dx.doi.org/10.25673/118320
Title: Prevention of peritoneal adhesions after gynecological surgery : a systematic review
Author(s): Schäfer, Sebastian DanielLook up in the Integrated Authority File of the German National Library
Alkatout, IbrahimLook up in the Integrated Authority File of the German National Library
Dornhöfer, NadjaLook up in the Integrated Authority File of the German National Library
Herrmann, Joerg
Klapdor, RüdigerLook up in the Integrated Authority File of the German National Library
Meinhold-Heerlein, IvoLook up in the Integrated Authority File of the German National Library
Meszaros, Jozsef
Mustea, AlexanderLook up in the Integrated Authority File of the German National Library
Oppelt, PeterLook up in the Integrated Authority File of the German National Library
Wallwiener, MarkusLook up in the Integrated Authority File of the German National Library
Krämer, BernhardLook up in the Integrated Authority File of the German National Library
Issue Date: 2024
Type: Article
Language: English
Abstract: Importance: The formation of adhesions after gynecological surgery not only has detrimental impacts on those affected, including pain, obstruction, and infertility, but also imposes a high economic burden on healthcare systems worldwide. Objective: The aim of this review was to evaluate the adhesion prevention potential of all currently available adhesion barriers for gynecological surgery. Evidence acquisition: We systematically searched MEDLINE and CENTRAL databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the use of adhesion barriers as compared with peritoneal irrigation or no treatment in gynecological surgery. Only RCTs with second-look surgery to evaluate adhesions in the pelvic/abdominal (but not intrauterine) cavity were included. Results: We included 45 RCTs with a total of 4,120 patients examining a total of 10 unique types of barriers in second-look gynecological surgery. While RCTs on oxidized regenerated cellulose (significant improvement in 6 of 14 trials), polyethylene glycol with/without other agents (4/10), hyaluronic acid and hyaluronate + carboxymethylcellulose (7/10), icodextrin (1/3), dextran (0/3), fibrin-containing agents (1/2), expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (1/1), N,O-carboxymethylchitosan (0/1), and modified starch (1/1) overall showed inconsistent findings, results for expanded polytetrafluoroethylene, hyaluronic acid, and modified starch yielded the greatest improvements regarding adhesion reduction at 75%, 0–67%, and 85%, respectively. Conclusions and relevance: Best results for adhesion prevention were reported after applying Gore-Tex Surgical Membrane, hyaluronic acid, and 4DryField®. As Gore-Tex Surgical Membrane is nonabsorbable, it is associated with a greater risk of new adhesion formation due to second-look surgery to remove the product. 4DryField® yielded the greatest improvement in adhesion score compared to all other barrier agents (85%). For better comparability, future studies should use standardized scores and put more emphasis on patient-reported outcome measures, such as pain and infertility.
URI: https://opendata.uni-halle.de//handle/1981185920/120279
http://dx.doi.org/10.25673/118320
Open Access: Open access publication
License: (CC BY 4.0) Creative Commons Attribution 4.0(CC BY 4.0) Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
Journal Title: Archives of gynecology and obstetrics
Publisher: Springer
Publisher Place: Berlin
Volume: 310
Issue: 2
Original Publication: 10.1007/s00404-024-07584-1
Page Start: 655
Page End: 672
Appears in Collections:Open Access Publikationen der MLU

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
s00404-024-07584-1.pdf1.01 MBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open