Effect of Bioactive Polypeptides on Leaking Large Bowel Anastomosis and Intestines in the Rat

Anastomotic leakage and postoperative adhesions represent major complications after colorectal surgery. We have previously shown a positive effect on both anastomotic strength and abdominal adhesions by the use of differently charged bioactive polypeptides. The present study aimed to investigate the effect of the same polypeptides on the healing of an insufficient intestinal anastomosis, as well as on accidental intestinal injury, in addition to measuring the preventive effect against the development of abdominal adhesions. An insufficient, and thereby potentially leaking, intestinal anastomosis and punctures of the intestine (“accidental intestinal injury model”) were performed in rats. The treatment groups received intraperitoneal administration of poly-L-lysine and poly-L-glutamate, while controls received sodium chloride. Burst pressure, extent of abdominal adhesions, and postoperative complications were analyzed in both experimental models. A significant decrease of adhesions was seen in all animals treated with polypeptides (p <. 05). Burst pressure was significantly higher (p <. 001) in animals with intestinal perforation as seen on day 1 and then decreasing. A significant decrease in the incidence of peritonitis was also noted early (day 1) in this model (p =. 002). The mortality and complications were high in the intestinal anastomosis model, though not affected by treatment with polypeptides. Intraabdominal adhesions were significantly reduced using polypeptides in this study, with no observed effect on other postsurgical complications. There were signs of less infectious complications in polypeptide treated animals. In animals with accidental intestinal injury, a higher burst pressure was noted in treated animals.

[1]  R. Andersson,et al.  Novel treatment in peritoneal adhesion prevention: Protection by polypeptides , 2006, Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology.

[2]  R. Andersson,et al.  Increasing anastomosis safety and preventing abdominal adhesion formation by the use of polypeptides in the rat , 2006, International Journal of Colorectal Disease.

[3]  R. Andersson,et al.  Prevention of postoperative peritoneal adhesions: Effects of lysozyme, polylysine and polyglutamate versus hyaluronic acid , 2005, Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology.

[4]  Z. Cohen,et al.  Surgical aspects of familial adenomatous polyposis , 1988, International Journal of Colorectal Disease.

[5]  A. Senagore,et al.  Outcomes and prediction of hospital readmission after intestinal surgery. , 2004, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[6]  A. Gürel,et al.  Comparison of the measurement methods of bursting pressure of intestinal anastomoses. , 2003, Hepato-gastroenterology.

[7]  M. Laato,et al.  Population‐based study of the surgical workload and economic impact of bowel obstruction caused by postoperative adhesions , 2003, The British journal of surgery.

[8]  Z. Cohen,et al.  A Prospective, Randomized, Multicenter, Controlled Study of the Safety of Seprafilm® Adhesion Barrier in Abdominopelvic Surgery of the Intestine , 2003, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

[9]  A. Parvaiz,et al.  Predicting risk and diminishing the consequences of anastomotic dehiscence following rectal resection , 2003, Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.

[10]  K. Rodgers,et al.  Effects of intraperitoneal 4% icodextrin solution on the healing of bowel anastomoses and laparotomy incisions in rabbits , 2003, Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.

[11]  L. Tietze,et al.  Effect of intraperitoneal antiadhesive fluids in a rat peritonitis model. , 2003, Archives of surgery.

[12]  I. Kanellos,et al.  Sutureless colonic anastomosis in the rat: a randomized controlled study , 2002, Techniques in Coloproctology.

[13]  Bengt Jeppsson,et al.  Anastomotic healing in the rat colon: comparison between a radiological method, breaking strength and bursting pressure , 2002, International Journal of Colorectal Disease.

[14]  H. van Goor,et al.  Hyaluronic acid‐based agents do not affect anastomotic strength in the rat colon, in either the presence or absence of bacterial peritonitis , 2000, The British journal of surgery.

[15]  Y. Parc,et al.  Management of postoperative peritonitis after anterior resection , 2000, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

[16]  Daniel J. Lynch,et al.  Role of a hyaluronate-based membrane in the prevention of peritonitis-induced adhesions , 2000, Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery.

[17]  T. Midtvedt,et al.  Postsurgical adhesion formation in germfree and ex-germfree rats--a study using three scoring scales. , 1999, Journal of investigative surgery : the official journal of the Academy of Surgical Research.

[18]  S. Perry,et al.  Abdominal adhesiolysis: inpatient care and expenditures in the United States in 1994. , 1998, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[19]  P. Braskén Healing of experimental colon anastomosis. , 1991, The European journal of surgery. Supplement. : = Acta chirurgica. Supplement.

[20]  M. Koruda,et al.  Experimental studies on the healing of colonic anastomoses. , 1990, The Journal of surgical research.

[21]  L. Fielding,et al.  Anastomotic integrity after operations for large-bowel cancer , 1980, British medical journal.

[22]  N. G. Graham,et al.  Anastomotic dehiscence after anterior resection of rectum and sigmoid , 1970, The British journal of surgery.