A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Hyaluronic acid/carboxymethylcellulose membrane barrier versus taurolidine for the prevention of adhesions to polypropylene mesh. | LitMetric

Background: A hyaluronic acid/carboxymethylcellulose (HA/CMC) membrane is an effective measure to prevent polypropylene mesh induced adhesions. We hypothesized that taurolidine 2% solution might be a cost-effective alternative to decrease adhesion formation.

Materials And Methods: Twenty-four rats were randomized into three groups: mesh alone (group 1), mesh + taurolidine 2% (group 2), and mesh + HA/CMC (group 3). Polypropylene mesh (4 cm2) was used to repair surgically induced anterior abdominal wall defects. Taurolidine 2%or a HA/CMC membrane was used as an antiadhesive measure. The animals were sacrificed 6 weeks after the operation, and adhesions to the prosthetic material were evaluated with digital image analysis.

Results: Group 1 (mesh alone) had the highest adhesion ratio (58.5 +/- 4.8%) compared with groups 2 and 3 (p < 0.05). The differences between groups 2 (mesh + taurolidine 2%; adhesion ratio 42.9 +/- 1.6%) and 3 (mesh + HA/CMC; adhesion ratio 40.3 +/- 3.0%) were not significant (p > 0.05).

Conclusions: The animals of both treatment groups (2 and 3) had lower adhesion ratios compared with the controls (group 1). In particular, the HA/CMC membrane did not present with a superior antiadhesive effect compared with taurolidine. Therefore, taurolidine is a cost-effective alternative to HA/CMC membranes when a polypropylene mesh is used in direct contact with the abdominal viscera.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000094748DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

polypropylene mesh
16
ha/cmc membrane
12
group mesh
12
adhesion ratio
12
mesh
10
hyaluronic acid/carboxymethylcellulose
8
cost-effective alternative
8
groups mesh
8
mesh taurolidine
8
mesh ha/cmc
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!