Adhesiolysis in Patients Undergoing a Repeat Median Laparotomy

BACKGROUND: Adhesiolysis during repeat surgery is associated with a high incidence of iatrogenic enterotomies and an increase in postoperative complications. Identification of risk factors would improve preoperative counseling and operating room strategy. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify preoperative risk factors for prolonged and difficult adhesiolysis in a repeat median laparotomy. DESIGN: This is a prospective cohort study. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to assess the risk factors for prolonged and difficult adhesiolysis. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at Radboud University Medical Center. PATIENTS: Patients participating in the LAPAD study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01236625) undergoing an elective repeat median laparotomy were selected. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Detailed data regarding adhesiolysis to gain entry to the abdomen and adhesions underneath the previous incision were gathered by direct observation. RESULTS: A total of 259 patients underwent a repeat median laparotomy. Adhesiolysis was required for 230 patients (89%); the remaining 29 patients (11%) did not have adhesions underneath the incision. Median adhesiolysis time underneath the midline incision was 10 minutes (interquartile range, 5–25). Seventy-six patients (29%) had grade 1 or grade 2 adhesions; 108 (42%) had grade 3; and 46 (18%) had grade 4. The number of previous laparotomies was the only independent risk factor for prolonged (p ⩽ 0.01; 95% CI, 2.5–14.10) and difficult adhesiolysis (p ⩽ 0.01; OR, 4.21; 95% CI, 1.74–10.17). History of peritonitis, anatomical location of previous surgery, and the time interval between consecutive median laparotomies did not prolong adhesiolysis. LIMITATIONS: This study involved retrospective data collection of patients’ medical histories. No data were collected on the severity of previous peritonitis. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that 4 or more previous laparotomies and the presence or history of an intraperitoneal synthetic mesh are independently associated with a longer duration of adhesiolysis needed to gain access to the abdomen. A short time interval between median laparotomies or a history of peritonitis did not prolong the duration of adhesiolysis.

[1]  M. Stommel,et al.  Benefits and harms of adhesion barriers for abdominal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis , 2014, The Lancet.

[2]  J. Jeekel,et al.  Burden of adhesions in abdominal and pelvic surgery: systematic review and met-analysis , 2013, BMJ.

[3]  R. Bleichrodt,et al.  Adhesiolysis-Related Morbidity in Abdominal Surgery , 2013, Annals of surgery.

[4]  N. Bouvy,et al.  Adhesion Awareness: A National Survey of Surgeons , 2010, World Journal of Surgery.

[5]  J. Fedder,et al.  Noninvasive detection and mapping of intraabdominal adhesions: a review of the current literature , 2010, Surgical Endoscopy.

[6]  J. Connor,et al.  Application of Adcon-P or Seprafilm in consecutive laparotomies using a murine model. , 2004, American journal of surgery.

[7]  T. Fabian,et al.  Staged Management of Giant Abdominal Wall Defects: Acute and Long-Term Results , 2003, Annals of surgery.

[8]  M. Diamond,et al.  Differential expression of TGF-β1 and TGF-β3 in serosal tissues of human intraperitoneal organs and peritoneal adhesions , 2001 .

[9]  M. Parker,et al.  Postoperative adhesions: Ten-year follow-up of 12,584 patients undergoing lower abdominal surgery , 2001, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

[10]  N. Chegini,et al.  Overproduction of transforming growth factor-beta1 (TGF-beta1) is associated with adhesion formation and peritoneal fibrinolytic impairment. , 2001, Surgery.

[11]  M. Diamond,et al.  Differential expression of TGF-beta1 and TGF-beta3 in serosal tissues of human intraperitoneal organs and peritoneal adhesions. , 2001, Human reproduction.

[12]  J. Fleshman,et al.  Effect of previous surgery on abdominal opening time , 2000, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

[13]  M. Coleman,et al.  Impact of previous surgery on time taken for incision and division of adhesions during laparotomy , 2000, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

[14]  M. Parker,et al.  Adhesion-related hospital readmissions after abdominal and pelvic surgery: a retrospective cohort study , 1999, The Lancet.

[15]  J. Jeekel,et al.  Foreign material in postoperative adhesions. , 1996, Annals of surgery.

[16]  F. Nezhat,et al.  The Incidence of Adhesions After Prior Laparotomy: A Laparoscopic Appraisal , 1995, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[17]  R. Woods,et al.  Reversal of Hartmann's procedure: Effect of timing and technique on ease and safety , 1994, Diseases of the colon and rectum.

[18]  A. Roe,et al.  Reversal of Hartmann's procedure: Timing and operative technique , 1991, The British journal of surgery.

[19]  H. Zühlke,et al.  [Pathophysiology and classification of adhesions]. , 1990, Langenbecks Archiv fur Chirurgie. Supplement II, Verhandlungen der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Chirurgie. Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Chirurgie. Kongress.

[20]  S. A. Cooke,et al.  The significance of starch powder contamination in the aetiology of peritoneal adhesions , 1977, The British journal of surgery.