| Title |
Histologic study of peritoneal adhesions in children and in a rat model
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Pediatric Surgery International, September 2002
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00383-002-0872-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
M. Torre, A. Favre, A. Pini Prato, A. Brizzolara, G. Martucciello |
| Abstract |
Peritoneal adhesions (PA) represent a major cause of morbidity in pediatric surgical patients. The pathogenesis is still largely unknown. A possible role could be played by foreign bodies (FB) accidentally contaminating the operative field during surgery. We report a histologic study of PA in a rat model and in children, investigating the role of FB in their formation. Abdominal adhesions were studied in 18 rats. In 6 (group A) we performed a laparotomy and rubbed the visceral and parietal peritoneum with a cotton bud. In 6 (group B) we performed a minimal laparotomy and injected powdered autologous and heterologous material into the peritoneal cavity, avoiding any peritoneal abrasions. In 6 (group C) we performed a laparotomy and applied both treatment methods, i.e., rubbing and injection of FB. After 1 month, at autopsy rats were classified according to the presence and grade of surgical adhesions. Twenty-two PA were also collected from seven children undergoing abdominal surgery in whom one or more procedures had been previously performed. The adhesions were stained with hematoxylin-eosin and Giemsa stains for histologic examination. Adhesions were found in 4 rats of group A and all 6 rats of group C. None were identified in group B. Group C rats showed a higher grade of adhesions with respect to group A. In both humans and animals PA were always found to coexist with microscopic particles of solid substances, which were incorporated inside the connective tissue. However, after simple injection of FB into the abdominal cavity we did not observe any PA. These data suggest that two different stimuli are necessary for adhesion formation: a direct lesion of the mesothelial layers and a solid substrate (FB). We underline the importance of reducing contamination with FB during surgery. On the basis of these considerations, the laparoscopic approach seems to be particularly pertinent. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Congo, The Democratic Republic of the | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 19 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 25% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Professor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 40% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 10% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 15% |
| Unknown | 2 | 10% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 June 2019.
All research outputs
#8,534,528
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Surgery International
#271
of 1,387 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,170
of 49,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Surgery International
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,387 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 49,503 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.