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

Seprafilm and adhesive small bowel obstruction in colorectal/abdominal surgery: an updated systematic review. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • A systematic review assessed the effectiveness of Seprafilm in preventing adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO) after abdominal surgeries, especially colorectal resections, using studies from 2000 to 2023.
  • The analysis of 17 studies with 62,886 patients showed that Seprafilm significantly reduced the occurrence of ASBO, but did not lower the need for further surgeries, while demonstrating effectiveness in laparoscopic procedures.
  • Despite the positive outcomes, clinicians should be cautious due to rare cases of inflammatory reactions and more research is necessary to identify which patients might benefit the most from Seprafilm.

Article Abstract

Background: The efficacy of Seprafilm in preventing clinically significant adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO) is controversial and deserves further review. The aim of this review was to assess the utility of Seprafilm in preventing clinically significant adhesive bowel obstruction after abdominal operations, with separate focus on colorectal resections. The secondary aim was to provide an updated literature review on the safety profile of this implant.

Methods: An up-to-date systematic review was performed on the available literature between 2000 and 2023 on PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, and Cochrane Library databases. The main outcome measures were rates of adhesive bowel obstruction, as well as rates of intervention. The secondary outcome was the clinical safety profile of Seprafilm as described in current literature.

Results: A total of 17 observational studies were included, accounting for 62,886 patients. Use of Seprafilm was associated with a significant reduction in adhesive bowel obstruction events (OR 0.449, 95% CI: 0.3271 to 0.6122, p < 0.001), with preserved efficacy seen in laparoscopic cases. This did not translate into a reduced rate of reintervention. Clinicians should also be aware of isolated reports of a paradoxical inflammatory reaction leading to fluid collections after Seprafilm use, although they appear uncommon.

Conclusion: Seprafilm can be considered in select patients although further study to determine which patients will benefit most is required.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11452999PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-024-02581-2DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

bowel obstruction
20
adhesive bowel
12
adhesive small
8
small bowel
8
systematic review
8
seprafilm preventing
8
preventing clinically
8
clinically adhesive
8
safety profile
8
seprafilm
5

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!