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: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

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

Effects of Oral Pirfenidone on Colon Anastomosis Healing and Adhesion Formation in Rats. | LitMetric

Introduction: Many experimental studies have examined multiple drugs or treatments to improve the healing of intestinal anastomoses. Synthetic prostacyclin analogs, immunosuppressants, erythropoietin, growth hormone, insulin-like growth factor type 1, synthetic metalloproteinases inhibitors, and hyperbaric oxygen therapy have produced promising results in low-risk models of anastomosis dehiscence. However, in high-risk models, only hyperbaric oxygen therapy has been shown to be useful. Pirfenidone (PFD), a commonly used antifibrosing drug, has not been shown to be effective for this purpose. Our objective was to evaluate the effects of PFD on anastomosis healing and adhesion genesis in a low-risk rat model of dehiscence of colonic anastomosis.

Methods: An experimental study was conducted on 40 healthy Wistar rats randomly assigned to the control group or PFD experimental group (20 rats in each group). Colon anastomosis was performed 3 cm above the peritoneal reflection using the same technique in all animals. Mechanical resistance was studied by measuring bursting pressure. Adhesions were evaluated macroscopic and histologically using common staining techniques. Animals received the first PFD dose 12 h after surgery at a dose of 500 mg/kg one a day (SID) for 5 consecutive days. On day 6, the animals were reoperated on to measure the bursting pressure in situ and to classify adhesions macroscopically, and the anastomosed colon was resected for histological analysis.

Results: There were no deaths, complications, or anastomosis dehiscence in either group. The mean bursting pressure was 120.8 ± 11 mm Hg and 135.5 ± 12.4 in the control and PFD groups, respectively (p < 0.001). The adhesions were less dense and had less inflammatory cell infiltration in the PFD group (p < 0.02 and 0.002, respectively). Collagen content was slightly higher in the PFD group (p = 0.04).

Conclusions: Our results revealed favorable effects of PFD in this low-risk colon anastomosis model; for example, the bursting pressure was higher, and the macroscopic adhesions were soft and exhibited less inflammatory infiltration and higher collagen content in the PFD group than in the control group. The results showing that PFD treatment was associated with better healing of minor adhesions seem to be paradoxical because the therapeutic indications for this drug are directed at treating fibrosing diseases.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000523711DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

bursting pressure
16
colon anastomosis
12
pfd group
12
pfd
10
anastomosis healing
8
healing adhesion
8
hyperbaric oxygen
8
oxygen therapy
8
anastomosis dehiscence
8
effects pfd
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!