Showing posts with label adhesion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label adhesion. Show all posts

Friday, April 11, 2014

Benefits and harms of adhesion barriers for abdominal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Richard P G ten Broek MD a Corresponding AuthorEmail Address, Martijn W J Stommel MD a, Chema Strik MD a, Prof Cornelis J H M van Laarhoven MD a,Fred
erik Keus MD b, Prof Harry van Goor FRCS a

Summary

Background

Formation of adhesions after peritoneal surgery results in high morbidity. Barriers to prevent adhesion are seldom applied, despite their ability to reduce the severity of adhesion formation. We evaluated the benefits and harms of four adhesion barriers that have been approved for clinical use.

Methods

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, CENTRAL, and Embase for randomised clinical trials assessing use of oxidised regenerated cellulose, hyaluronate carboxymethylcellulose, icodextrin, or polyethylene glycol in abdominal surgery. Two researchers independently identified reports and extracted data. We compared use of a barrier with no barrier for nine predefined outcomes, graded for clinical relevance. The primary outcome was reoperation for adhesive small bowel obstruction. We assessed systematic error, random error, and design error with the error matrix approach. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42012003321.

Findings

Our search returned 1840 results, from which 28 trials (5191 patients) were included in our meta-analysis. The risks of systematic and random errors were low. No trials reported data for the effect of oxidised regenerated cellulose or polyethylene glycol on reoperations for adhesive small bowel obstruction. Oxidised regenerated cellulose reduced the incidence of adhesions (relative risk [RR] 0·51, 95% CI 0·31—0·86). Some evidence suggests that hyaluronate carboxymethylcellulose reduces the incidence of reoperations for adhesive small bowel obstruction (RR 0·49, 95% CI 0·28—0·88). For icodextrin, reoperation for adhesive small bowel obstruction did not differ significantly between groups (RR 0·33, 95% CI 0·03—3·11). No barriers were associated with an increase in serious adverse events.

Interpretation

Oxidised regenerated cellulose and hyaluronate carboxymethylcellulose can safely reduce clinically relevant consequences of adhesions.

Funding

None.

Thursday, January 12, 2012

What is adhesion related disorder (ARD)?

What is adhesion related disorder (ARD)?
Adhesion related disorder is a complex set of symptoms related to adhesions. Patient’s primary complaint is usually chronic abdominal pain. Their symptoms can be primarily in one area of the abdomen but are often generalized, vague, crampy and difficult to define. The symptoms of ARD could include:

•Chronic pain
•Infertility
•Bowel obstruction
•Gastro-esophageal reflux disease, (GERD)
•Urinary Bladder dysfunction
•Pain and difficulty having a bowel movement
•Pain on movement such as: Walking, sitting or laying in certain positions.
•Loss of Nutrients due to poor eating habits or loss of appetite.
•Loss of employment due to lost work days
•Loss of family and social life
•Emotional Disorders such as: Depression, Thoughts of Suicide, Hopelessness
Other intestinal problems can accompany the pain. Constipation or obstruction is sometimes encountered. Alternating constipation with diarrhea from partial obstruction can also be seen. Symptoms may also be related

Friday, January 06, 2012

A direct comparison of seprafilm, adept, intercoat, and spraygel for adhesion prophylaxis.

J Surg Res. 2010 Jun 15;161(2):246-9. Epub 2008 Dec 10.
A direct comparison of seprafilm, adept, intercoat, and spraygel for adhesion prophylaxis.
Rajab TK, Wallwiener M, Planck C, Brochhausen C, Kraemer B, Wallwiener CW.
SourceUniversity of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany. Taufiek.Rajab@imperial.ac.uk

Abstract
BACKGROUND: Commercially available agents for adhesion prophylaxis are legion but there is a lack of direct comparisons between them. Here we compare four of the most commonly used adhesion barriers against a control group in a clinically relevant rat model.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Standardized lesions were created in Wistar rats using electrocautery and suturing. Subsequently, the experimental lesions were treated with Seprafilm (n = 30), Adept (n = 30), Intercoat (n = 30), Spraygel (n = 30), or no barrier (n = 30). The resulting adhesions were examined 14 d postoperatively.

RESULTS: The mean area covered by adhesion was 77% in the control group, 46% in animals treated with Seprafilm, 54% in animals treated with Adept, 55% in animals treated with Intercoat, and 68% in animals treated with Spraygel. The adhesion-free incidence was 20% (n = 6) of lesions treated with Seprafilm, 20% (n = 6) of lesions treated with Intercoat, 3% of lesions treated with Spraygel (n = 1), and 0% of lesions treated with Adept or the control group.

CONCLUSIONS: There were statistically significant differences between the barriers with regards to the area covered by adhesions and the adhesion-free incidence. In spite of this, a significant adhesion burden remains with all of the tested barriers.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19375716

Tuesday, December 27, 2011

Prevention of peritoneal adhesions: A promising role for gene therapy

More Good News for those who suffer from Adhesion Related Disorder!

Source: World J Gastroenterol


Prevention of peritoneal adhesions: A promising role for gene therapy; Atta HM; World Journal of Gastroenterology 17 (46), 5049-58 (Dec 2011)


Adhesions are the most frequent complication of abdominopelvic surgery, yet the extent of the problem, and its serious consequences, has not been adequately recognized. Adhesions evolved as a life-saving mechanism to limit the spread of intraperitoneal inflammatory conditions. Three different pathophysiological mechanisms can independently trigger adhesion formation. Mesothelial cell injury and loss during operations, tissue hypoxia and inflammation each promotes adhesion formation separately, and potentiate the effect of each other. Studies have repeatedly demonstrated that interruption of a single pathway does not completely prevent adhesion formation. This review summarizes the pathogenesis of adhesion formation and the results of single gene therapy interventions. It explores the promising role of combinatorial gene therapy and vector modifications for the prevention of adhesion formation in order to stimulate new ideas and encourage rapid advancements in this field.

http://www.docguide.com/prevention-peritoneal-adhesions-promising-role-gene-therapy?tsid=5

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

A Personal Case for Classical Homeopathy, Part I

Exerpt from :A Personal Case for Classical Homeopathy, Part I
Judith Acosta





Many years ago, I suddenly developed abdominal pain. I had not been sick in any other way and had no idea what was happening. I went for a gynecological exam and was told I was fine. The pain continued. I went back and after numerous exams was sent from the table to the couch. The psychiatrist sent me right back to the doctor. After about a year of bouncing back and forth with increasingly intense (searing, stabbing) pain, they finally "discovered" a mass several centimeters in width in the area of my left ovary.

At this point, the surgeons were called in. I was scheduled for an emergency laparotomy. As they wheeled me in, the surgeon said to my mother, "It could be cancer." I was 26.

After surgery, as soon as I stopped vomiting, the doctor told me that it was not cancer. My mother wept. He said it was a streptococcal infection (Strep B) that had created adhesions and that I could forget about having children. He proudly went on to inform us that they had "scraped me clean" and that I'd be on antibiotics for about a month.

I did as I was told. I was raised by a doctor, surrounded by doctors and had complete faith in the system.

Within a short time a whole new sort of pain emerged, this time, however, deeper. It was more localized, again on the left side. I thought the infection had returned. The pain continued for quite a while. I went to the doctor, but there was no infection. After dismissing it (and me) for at least a year again, I finally wound up in hospital. A cyst had burst. This cycle recurred every few months. They recommended birth control pills, pain pills and pills I didn't understand. Nothing helped. By the fourth rupture and hospital visit, they recommended a full hysterectomy.
Read the entire article here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/judith-acosta/homeopathy_b_1150591.html

Friday, December 16, 2011

Please stand by for World Wide Breaking News ~ The day that changes Adhesion Related Disorder forever


We will be bringing you the story that will change the lives of those suffering from Adhesion Related Disorder forever.

This news will empower you to advocate for yourself and never again be told,
"It's all in your head!"


Thursday, December 15, 2011

Behind the badge with Sheriff Stephens ~ "Back then, they called it heartburn!"

Exerpt from full article: http://www.forest-blade.com/news/community/article_f9faf6aa-25d4-11e1-bbc7-0019bb2963f4.html

In the past year, however, Stephens has faced medical difficulties that made it difficult to keep pace with his many obligations. Twenty-three years ago, Stephens was diagnosed with esophageal cancer as a result of acid reflux disease. Though he's been cancer-free since then, the surgery did lasting damage.


"Back then, they called it heartburn!" he says. "They caught it early and they were able to remove the cancer fully. Through the years, the surgery caused a lot of different problems, and I've had my share of them, but I began to have trouble digesting food and it kept getting worse until this year, when I had to have serious surgery to reconstruct my digestive system."


The surgery has solved a lot of Stephens's problems with adhesions and scar tissue from previous surgeries and he is back on his feet and recovering well.


"I was blessed to get through it. It was a tough time for me and for my department," he says. "I can't say enough good words about my employees. They carried on and never missed a lick while I was down recovering from that major surgery."

What is ovarian remnant syndrome?

Q:What is ovarian remnant syndrome?

A: Ovarian remnant syndrome (ORS) occurs if any ovarian tissue is left after surgery to remove both ovaries and fallopian tubes, called a bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. The syndrome occurs if this ovarian tissue causes severe pelvic pain and/or a pelvic mass.

The condition typically occurs because of the surgical technique used to remove the ovaries. Although ORS is considered fairly rare, its incidence appears to have increased in the past 40 years, possibly related to the increased use of laparoscopic surgeries.These surgeries allow the surgeon to operate through two or three tiny incisions instead of a large abdominal incision.

Certain factors increase the risk of incomplete ovarian removal, including a history of endometriosis, pelvic inflammatory disease, previous abdominal or pelvic surgeries and pelvic adhesions. Adhesions are scar tissue that forms after pelvic or abdominal surgery and "sticks" to organs and other tissue. Adhesions make it difficult for the surgeon to completely identify and remove the ovaries because of the fibrous tissue that binds an ovary with the other structures or with the peritoneum, the membrane that covers the inside of the abdomen and pelvis.

If any ovarian tissue is left in your pelvis, it can, in some instances, continue to produce hormones.

The most common symptoms of ovarian remnant syndrome are constant, chronic pelvic pain, difficult or painful intercourse, cyclic pelvic pain, and painful urination and bowel movements.

The condition is diagnosed based on a careful medical history. One sign that there may be residual ovarian tissue is if after your ovaries were removed, you didn't immediately start hormone therapy but didn't experience menopausal symptoms, such as hot flashes. This would suggest that you may still be producing estrogens. An alternative situation is if after surgery, you started hormone therapy and then discontinued it for some reason but didn't experience these symptoms.

Your doctor may also perform an ultrasound, CT scan or MRI to identify any ovarian tissue or pelvic mass and may measure blood levels of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and estradiol. Estradiol is produced by the ovaries and FSH by the pituitary gland in response to hormonal signals from the ovaries. Levels of estradiol should be very low and levels of FSH should be very high after both ovaries have been removed.

If your doctor does find ovarian tissue remnants, you may be treated with medication to suppress any ovarian function, surgery to remove the tissue, or, as a last resort, radiation to destroy the tissue.

http://www.healthywomen.org/content/ask-expert/1761/ovarian-remnant-syndrome?context=womentalk/ask-the-expert&context_title=ask-the-expert

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Preventing Adhesions in Obstetric and Gynecologic Surgical Procedures

Preventing Adhesions in Obstetric and Gynecologic Surgical Procedures
Víctor Hugo González-Quintero, MD, MPH and Francisco E Cruz-Pachano, MD
Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Miami School of Medicine, Miami, FL Other Sections▼
AbstractAdhesion FormationAdhesion-Related MorbidityPrevention of Postoperative AdhesionsUse of Adhesion BarriersAdhesion Prevention at the Time of Cesarean DeliverySummaryReferencesAbstractAdhesive disease represents a significant cause of morbidity for postoperative patients. Most surgical procedures performed by obstetrician-gynecologists are associated with pelvic adhesions that cause subsequent serious sequelae, including small bowel obstruction, infertility, chronic pelvic pain, and difficulty in postoperative treatment, including complexity during subsequent surgical procedures. The technology of adhesion prevention has significantly progressed. There are 3 methods approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the prevention of postoperative adhesions, including Adept®, Interceed®, and Seprafilm®. The latter barrier is the most widely studied. This article reviews the current choices available for adhesion prevention barriers as well as surgical adjuncts that traditionally have been studied for that purpose.Key words: Adhesion prevention, Postoperative morbidity, Cesarean deliveries, Gynecological surgeries
More of the abstract click here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2672996/

Saturday, November 19, 2011

Saturday, November 05, 2011

Scientists uncover the secrets behind rapid tissue repair

10 October 2011


UK researchers have discovered how cells detect and respond to tissue damage. Their findings could open up new opportunities for improving tissue repair in patients after illness or surgery. When a tissue is wounded, cells detect damage via changes in their environment. Plasma leaking from broken blood vessels causes fibroblast cells to migrate into the damaged tissue, making the wound contract and plugging it by depositing substances such as collagen, which gives structural support to the tissue.

Now, researchers at the University of Bristol and the Wellcome Trust Centre for Cell-Matrix Research, University of Manchester - funded by the Wellcome Trust - have examined the signalling process that occurs in damaged tissues and identified the cellular mechanisms responsible for activating repair.

Lead author Dr Mark Bass said: "Each of these processes requires the turnover of cellular adhesions [repeated sticking and unsticking of cells], and the challenge has been to determine how cells detect tissue damage and modify their adhesive properties accordingly."

Using an imaging technique known as atomic force microscopy, the team were able to show how a protein, syndecan-4, triggers the uptake and redeployment of adhesive molecules. This novel sequence of signals enables fibroblasts and other cells to respond to changes in tissue structure and migrate along the matrix fibres which make up the skin. By moving towards a damage signal, cells are able to arrive at the wound far more quickly than if they searched for it randomly. This results in a very efficient healing response.

Dr Bass added: "We find that this signalling cascade is essential for efficient healing; this opens up considerable opportunities for improving tissue repair in patients."


Image: A scanning electron micrograph of the underside of a sticking plaster used to treat a razor blade cut. Credit: Anne Weston, LRI, CRUK, Wellcome Images.


Reference
Bass MD et al. A syndecan-4 hair trigger initiates wound healing through caveolin- and RhoG-regulated integrin endocytosis. Developmental Cell 2011 (epub ahead of print).
http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/News/2011/News/WTVM053022.htm

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Adhesion-Prevention Strategy in C-Sections: Focus on Risk Reduction

Adhesion-Prevention Strategy in C-Sections: Focus on Risk Reduction
By Victor Hugo Gonzalez-Quintero, M.D., M.P.H. Interim Director, Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine Associate Professor of Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology Director, Residency Program | October 26, 2011
University of Miami/Jackson Memorial Medical Center

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://hcp.obgyn.net/pregnancy-and-birth/content/article/1760982/1977693

Cesarean deliveries are now the most commonly performed abdominal surgery in the United States.1 In 2005, an estimated 30.3 % of all births involved C-section procedures2, and preliminary estimates from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicate that the incidence of C-sections will continue to rise in the coming decade.3

The increased use of C-section procedures presents some important health considerations for specialists in maternal fetal medicine. According to the results of a study published in the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology in May 20071:

Among women who underwent a second C-section, 46% (100 out of 217), developed pelvic adhesions.
Among women treated with a third C-section, 75% (48 out of 64) developed adhesions.
Among women treated with a fourth C-section, five out of six (83%) developed pelvic adhesions.
The development of adhesions was also shown to have an impact on time-to-delivery. On average, infant delivery was delayed 5.6 minutes among women who had a second C-section as compared to an average primary C-section. The comparative delay increased to 8.5 minutes and 18.1 minutes, respectively, for third and fourth C-sections
The Rationale for Proactive Strategies to Prevent Adhesions in C-Sections

Time to infant delivery once anesthesia has been administered and risk of surgical complexity at repeat C-section are of critical concern, particularly in cases of emergent C-section. Based on these findings and continuing trends in the incidence and impact of C-sections, obstetrical practices are increasingly considering strategies to help reduce the risk of adhesions. In some practices, strategies focus on restrictions in the use of C-section procedures among patients. The availability of proven adhesion prevention strategies has also built support for a more proactive strategy to reduce risk, especially among patients treated with multiple C-section procedures. Following a comprehensive review of options, our division led a practice-wide initiative to incorporate adhesion prevention strategies to reduce the risk of adhesions in most C-section procedures.

In considering this plan, which was introduced in 2005, we identified several factors in support of a more proactive adhesion prevention strategy:

As a busy obstetrical practice performing several thousand C-section procedures each year, our department is clearly positioned to be affected by trends in surgery that might increase the risk of adhesions among our patients. Based on available data it became apparent that an increased risk of post-surgical adhesions among our patients could have a significant impact in terms of treatment complications and delayed delivery time.
The use of an adhesion barrier was already in place in formulary at the hospital and was widely used in gynecologic oncology procedures where the risk of post-operative adhesions is well-established.
Based on established familiarity with adhesion prevention strategies in gynecologic oncology, support for a preventative strategy in obstetrics was in place among labor and delivery management teams familiar with both the proven efficacy of adhesion prevention strategies and the potential impact of adhesion development on our patients.
The introduction of an adhesion prevention strategy would require only minimal additional staff training and monitoring.
Data related to the safety and efficacy of adhesion prevention barriers was widely available.
Importantly, to deliver maximum benefit we determined that a preventative strategy to reduce the risk of adhesions in C-sections must be positioned as a complement to superior surgical technique at every stage.
The availability of more conclusive data related to the risk of adhesions among C-section patients will help to shape even more effective prevention strategies in the years ahead. In this area, however, the rapid increase in C-section procedures challenges us to identify the optimal strategies to reduce patient risk as quickly as possible. While available data related to the morbidity associated with C-section adhesions are limited, we concluded that available data are sufficient at this stage to support a broad preventative intervention strategy as outlined. We are continuing to monitor results based on this strategy to draw more precise conclusions related to treatment experience.

1. Morales KJ, Gordon MC, Bates GW Jr. Post cesarean delivery adhesions associated with delayed delivery of infant. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007;196:461.e1-461.e6.
2. Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Sutton PD, Ventura SJ, Menacker F, Kirmeyer S, Munson ML. Births: Final data for 2005. National vital statistics reports; vol 56 no 6. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics 2007.
3. Hamilton BE, Martin JA, Ventura SJ. Births Preliminary data for 2006. National vital statistics reports; vol 56 no 7. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. 2007.

Monday, October 17, 2011

Functional Bowel Disorders

Functional Bowel Disorders
Michael Snyder, MD
Clinical Instructor
Colon and Rectal Surgery
University of Texas at Houston Health Center
Clinical Associate Professor
Baylor College of Medicine
Houston, Texas
http://www.fascrs.org/physicians/education/core_subjects/2005/functional_bowel_disorders/

Functional bowel disorders are syndromes characterized by chronic gastrointestinal tract symptoms in patients without significant infectious, metabolic or anatomical abnormalities. Functional gastrointestinal disorders can affect the entire digestive tract from the mouth to the anus. The two most common functional disorders seen by the colon and rectal surgeon are irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and functional constipation which affect the mid to lower gastrointestinal tract.

Irritable Bowel Syndrome

Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS), the most frequent condition diagnosed in most gastroenterology practices, is responsible for over three million office visits annually. Depending on the diagnostic inclusion criteria, the prevalence of IBS in the United States is between six and twenty percent (1). Female predominance is as high as 2:1 in some studies. While it is primarily a disorder of younger people in the third or fourth decade of life, up to 23% of patients with IBS have symptoms that persist into old age. A new diagnosis of IBS should be made cautiously in patients older than 60, however, because this age group has an increased incidence of other colonic disorders with similar symptoms. Since there has never been a well-designed study on the natural history of IBS, the reasons for the female predominance are unclear. Whether this represents a true difference or is secondary to health care seeking behavior is uncertain. IBS is a chronic disorder with at least 75% of patients having persistent symptoms five years or more after the diagnosis is first considered (2).

The understanding of the pathophysiology of IBS has evolved significantly over the past half century. Originally IBS was thought to represent a nervous disorder with augmented gastrointestinal motility occurring in patients under stress. Recent research has shown that IBS is a complex multifaceted disorder. Abnormalities in intestinal motility in conjunction with heightened visceral sensory input and processing are important aspects of the disease. In many patients with IBS, abdominal pain in the immediate postprandial period is associated with either rhythmic contractions or high amplitude prolonged contractions. These alterations in the migratory motor complex can either delay or accelerate intestinal transit (3). In addition, increased sensitivity to pain in the gastrointestinal tract has been demonstrated in patients with IBS. Several studies have suggested that patients with IBS may process sensory input from the gastrointestinal tract differently and have an exaggerated response to intestinal distention (4). Finally, two studies have demonstrated that infectious gastroenteritis may increase the possibility of developing IBS later in life (5,6), presumably by damaging the enteric nerves responsible for peristalsis.

IBS is defined by abdominal discomfort associated with altered bowel habits. As there are no biochemical or structural markers, IBS is diagnosed by the absence of organic disease and the presence of a constellation of symptoms. The Rome II diagnostic criteria divide IBS into three relatively equal groups depending on the presence of diarrhea, constipation, or alternating diarrhea and constipation. These criteria for IBS require at least twelve weeks duration of symptoms in one year that need not be consecutive. Symptoms defining IBS are abdominal pain or discomfort relieved with defecation or associated with a change in the frequency or appearance of the stool. Nine symptoms supporting the diagnosis of IBS include (a greater than 25% occurrence of): 1) Fewer than three bowel movements per week, 2) More than three bowel movements per day, 3) Hard or lumpy stools, 4) Loose (mushy) or watery stools. 5) Straining during bowel movement, 6) Urgency, 7) Passing mucous during bowel movement, 9) Abdominal fullness, bloating or swelling. IBS with diarrhea is associated with one or more of the supportive symptoms numbered 2,4 or 6 and none of 1, 3 or 5. IBS with constipation is associated with one or more of the supportive symptoms numbered1,3 or 5 and none of 2, 4 or 6 (7). An individual patient may change from one diagnostic group to the other during the treatment of this, so symptom based management is currently recommended.

Patients prone to diarrhea find that the first stool in the morning is usually normal in consistency. Subsequent bowel movements, however, become more watery and mucoid, and are associated with intestinal cramps, rectal urgency and bloating. Symptoms are relieved with the passage of stool but often quickly return. Patients prone to constipation also note mucous either in the stool or separately. The stool consistency is often hard, and/or rocky. Many patients strain to complete defecation or experience incomplete evacuation. Fecal incontinence occurs in up to 20% of patients with IBS, primarily in those with concomitant diarrhea. This is possibly due to repetitive reflex relaxation of the sphincter mechanism associated with colonic spasms.

The evaluation of patients who fall into one of the Rome II criteria is limited as long as no "alarm" symptoms or signs are noted. These "alarm" symptoms or signs include hematochezia, weight loss greater than ten pounds, family history of colon cancer, recurring fever, anemia, and severe chronic diarrhea. Routine colonoscopy for colon cancer screening is no different than the general population. Based on the best current data, the probability of colorectal cancer, inflammatory bowel disease and infectious diarrhea is less than 1% among IBS patients without "alarm" symptoms or signs (8). As this is similar to that of healthy patients undergoing screening, the routine use of endoscopy, radiologic tests, or microbiological evaluation is unnecessary. The only exception occurs in those patients with IBS and diarrhea. The incidence of celiac sprue in these patients is 5% and routine testing of these patients should certainly be considered (9).

Because the precise etiology of IBS is unknown, and there is a lack of objective biochemical markers, treatment of IBS has focused upon the relief of symptoms. Treatment of IBS is indicated when the symptoms of IBS significantly decrease the quality of life. It should result in improvement of global IBS symptoms such as abdominal pain, bloating and altered bowel habits.

For patients with IBS and constipation initial treatment involves increasing both the amount of daily fiber to 25-30gms and water intake to 64oz a day. For many patients with mild symptoms this may be all that is required. If dietary changes are insufficient, fiber supplements such as methylcellulose or psyllium are added. While these products act as hydrophilic agents to bind water and prevent excessive dehydration, they do not relieve abdominal pain and may accentuate bloating. Other laxatives such as polyethylene glycol solutions have been used with some success, but also do not address the abdominal discomfort. Tegaserod, a selective serotonin type 4 receptor agonist, binds to the enteric receptors initiating the peristaltic reflex. Four randomized controlled trials have compared tegaserod 6mg b.i.d. to placebo and found significant global symptom relief in women with IBS and constipation. The use of tegaserod in men or in patients with alternating diarrhea and constipation is not established (10).

For patients with IBS and diarrhea, loperamide has been studied in randomized control trials and found to decrease stool frequency, improve stool consistency, but have no effect on abdominal pain or bloating. Low doses of tricyclic antidepressants may also decrease the frequency of diarrhea. In those women who fail to respond to this conservative therapy and who have severe diarrhea predominant IBS, the serotonin type 3-receptor antagonist alosetron may be used. Five randomized controlled studies have demonstrated efficacy. Side effects include constipation (25%) and ischemic colitis (84 cases in the literature)(10).

Therapy for the abdominal discomfort associated with IBS has been disappointing until recently. Traditionally, antispasmodic agents have been prescribed. Dicyclomine and hyoscyamine are the two agents available in the United States. The only trial to demonstrate efficacy of either medication was associated with a 70% rate of anticholinergic side effects (10). Since these side effects include constipation, the two antispasmodic medications should be used cautiously in IBS patients with constipation. Antispasmodic medications should be taken 30-60 minutes prior to a meal to prevent postprandial abdominal pain and bloating. Currently, however, the most effective and preferred medication for abdominal pain and bloating is the previously mentioned serotonin type 4 receptor agonist, tegaserod.

Other therapies for IBS include behavioral modification and investigational drugs. Anxiety and depression are noted in up to 20% of IBS patients. Behavioral therapy for IBS has been evaluated in sixteen randomized controlled studies. While none of these examined global IBS improvement, most studies demonstrated that attenuation of individual IBS symptoms correlated with a reduction in anxiety and depression. In patients with sleep disorders, the administration of melatonin significantly diminished abdominal pain and rectal urgency (11). Other medications with visceral analgesic properties are being investigated to include the kappa opioid agonist fedotozine and neurokinin receptor antagonists. Probiotics are also being evaluated because of promising results controlling flatulence in a controlled trial.

Constipation

Constipation, a common disorder seen by both primary care and specialty physicians, is responsible for more than 2.5 million annual office visits. Many people do not seek medical care and instead self medicate with a multitude of over the counter and alternative medications. Constipation is a symptom of many diseases and the medications used to treat them. It is interchangeably used to describe patients with stool that is difficult to pass, passes infrequently, or has a hard consistency. Because of a lack of consensus defining constipation in the literature, the International Congress of Gastroenterology formulated the Rome II criteria. They defined constipation as abdominal discomfort of at least twelve weeks duration in the previous twelve months (need not be consecutive) having two or more of the following symptoms; 1) Straining more than 25% of the time, 2) Lumpy or hard stools more than 25% of the time, 3) Anorectal blockage, 4) Incomplete evacuation, 5) Need for manual maneuvers, and 6) Less than three stools per week. In these patients loose stools may not be present and there should not be sufficient criteria for the diagnosis of irritable bowel syndrome (12).

The physiology of constipation primarily encompasses the transit of stool through the colon, rectum and anus. Stool enters the colon as a liquid and becomes solid during passage to the rectosigmoid. Segmental and high amplitude propagating contractions are the two major contractile activities in the colon. The propagating contractions are responsible for the movement of stool to the anal sphincter, which regulates eventual stool evacuation. These propagating contractions originate from pacemakers found in the muscle layer of the colon called the interstial cells of Cajal (13). The loss or inactivity of these cells may play a role in patients with slow transit constipation.

Defecation is the evacuation of stool from the rectum and is determined by the propulsive force of the stool and the resistance of the anus. It is triggered by distention of the rectum by stool. Propulsive force consists of voluntary increases in intra-abdominal pressure and involuntary high amplitude contractions of the rectum. Resistance to defecation decreases with voluntary straightening of the anorectal angle in conjunction with relaxation of the external sphincter and involuntary relaxation of the internal anal sphincter.

The etiology of constipation may be primary or secondary. The more common secondary causes of constipation are listed in Table 1. Many patients have multiple factors that may contribute to their constipation. Notably, medications, including over-the-counter and herbal preparations, are a factor in up to 40% of patients (14).

The evaluation of constipated patients begins with a thorough history and physical exam to identify one of the numerous secondary causes of constipation. A colonoscopy or combined sigmoidoscopy and barium enema should be considered to identify malignant or anatomical abnormalities in the colon and rectum. A careful examination of the perineum and anus will help exclude anatomical outlet obstruction, the presence of a rectocele and abnormal perineal descent. Laboratory testing includes thyroid functions and electrolytes to help diagnose metabolic and endocrine abnormalities contributing to the constipation.

If the initial evaluation does not reveal a secondary cause for the constipation, a transit study is recommended to objectively measure the severity, and helps establish the primary cause of the constipation. The initial study called a SitzMark test is performed with radio-opaque markers that are swallowed. Abdominal radiographs are obtained on days 3 and 5. The radiograph on day 3 confirms the patient ingesting the markers. The presence of more than 25% of the markers in the colon at day 5 is indicative of a positive test. Markers evenly spread throughout the colon are consistent with slow transit constipation, while those that congregate in the rectosigmoid are indicative of an outlet obstruction. A negative SitzMark test with fewer than 25% of the markers on day 5 is suggestive of normal transit constipation or a patient who is not compliant with the instructions regarding no laxative use during the testing.

Further evaluation of outlet obstruction consists of anal manometry and defecography. Anal manometry permits documentation of the anorectal inhibitory reflex to rule out a short segment Hirschrprung’s disease. In addition, normal manometric sphincter pressures during simulated defecation are useful in excluding outlet obstruction. Defecography is particularly useful in the diagnosis of intra-anal prolapse, rectoceles, and other pelvic floor abnormalities. Barium paste is placed into the rectum and the act of defecation is visualized. Anorectal angle visualization, perineal descent and the nonemptying of rectoceles can be objectively measured.

There are three types of primary constipation that are important to recognize. The first type, colonic inertia, is associated with a lack of urgency and intractability resulting in many patients having several days to weeks between bowel movements. Daily use of stimulant laxatives is typical and evacuation is uncommon without medication. While the etiology is idiopathic in nature, the patients are overwhelmingly young women. Increasing dietary fiber or fiber supplements may make symptoms of bloating and abdominal cramps worse. SitzMark studies are often markedly positive demonstrating a characteristic pattern of markers relatively evenly spaced throughout the colon. It is important to rule out coexisting outlet obstruction with defecography and/or anal manometry. The second type, normal transit constipation, is characterized by evacuation frequency and stool consistency that is within the normal range, but the patients feel constipated. Bowel management regimens and reassurance are often all that is necessary to treat these patients. The third type, anismus or obstructed defecation, is characterized by the sensation of incomplete evacuation and the need to strain to produce a stool. SitzMark studies may be positive with most markers present in the rectosigmoid. Physical examination along with defecography and/or anal manometry is critical in determining both the exact etiology and response to therapy.

Treatment of functional constipation begins with dietary manipulation consisting of a high fiber diet (25-30gm/day) and augmented water intake (64oz/day). Most patients can be effectively managed with dietary measures alone or in conjunction with occasional laxative or enema use. For those patients who fail dietary measures, treatment with mild stimulating or osmotic laxatives can be safely done. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) is a poorly absorbed large polymer with substantial osmotic activity. When used in a solution that does not contain any salt, PEG can be ingested in large amounts without any harmful effect. PEG also binds water to the stool improving the consistency in many constipated patients. Other osmotic agents include non-absorbed carbohydrates such as lactulose. These agents also bind water and soften the stool. Complications include fermentation with consequent bloating, flatus and abdominal cramping.

Additional therapies for refractory constipation have attempted to address the lack of normal high amplitude contractions in the colon found in patients with slow transit constipation. The selective serotonin type 4 receptor agonist, tegaserod, is currently recommended for women with IBS and constipation. It acts by stimulating the serotonin type 4 receptors with a pronounced enterokinetic effect. Constipation was improved in 5-19% of women compared to placebo (15). Previous serotonin type 4 agonists such as cisipride and prucalopride also induced strong contractions of the proximal colon, but because of cardiac arrhythmias and carcinogenesis respectively, they have been withdrawn from the market. Another way to recreate the high amplitude contractions appears to be colonic pacing. In a small study pacing induced rectal evacuation in two-thirds of patients with total colonic inertia (16). Further studies will determine if it will become a replacement for extirpative surgical intervention.

Other medical approaches to stimulating the enteric neural plexuses include serotonin reuptake inhibitors, cholecystokinnin antagonists, antimuscarinic agents and serotonin type 1-receptor agonists. All these agents are currently being investigated and are not yet commercially available.

The surgical approach to constipation is one of last resort. Obstructive defecation is initially treated with biofeedback that improves symptoms in up to 70% of patients, although a rare patient may benefit from internal sphincterotomy. In patients with slow transit constipation refractory to medical therapy, attempt at segmental resection of the colon is unsuccessful. Total abdominal colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis is the preferred operation. Relief of abdominal pain and return to normal bowel function occur in up to 90% of patients with total abdominal colectomy. Risks of the surgery include ileus in approximately one-third of patients, small bowel obstruction, diarrhea, and possible incontinence (17).

Conclusion

Functional bowel diseases such as IBS and constipation are common disorders. The Rome II criteria permit more objective diagnosis and patient stratification. Therapy is determined by the major symptom or symptom complex. Therapy is often simply dietary modification, but may require medications, biofeedback and rarely surgery. As more knowledge about the enteric neural pathways and the influence of various neurotransmitters on bowel motility is discovered, focused treatment regimens with fewer side effects should be possible.

Table 1. Common Causes of Constipation

Dietary
Low fiber diet, inadequate fluid intake, ingestion of stool hardening foods.

Functional
Inadequate toilet facilities, depression, psychosis, ignoring need for bowel movement, immobility.

Endocrine, Metabolic
Diabetes mellitus, hypothyroidism, hypoparathyroidism, pregnancy, hypopituitarism, hypokalemia, hypercalcemia.

Neuropathy
Cerebrovascular accident, Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis, trauma, cerebral or spinal tumors, colonic inertia, Ogilvie’s syndrome, Hirschprung’s disease, Chagas’ disease.

Medication
Analgesics, anticonvulsants, antihistamines, antihypertensives, diuretics, chemotherapeutics, anticholinergics, metal ions and minerals.

Structural
Neoplasm, diverticular disease, inflammatory bowel disease, volvulus, ischemic colitis, endometriosis, anastomotic stricture.

Anal Outlet
Thrombosed hemorrhoids, anal fissure, rectal prolapse, proctitis, rectocele, nonrelaxing puborectalis, hypertrophic internal anal sphincter.

Bibliography

1.Olden, KW. Diagnosis of irritable bowel syndrome. Gastroenterology. 2002;122:1701-14.
2.Harvey RF, Mauad EC, Brown AM. Prognosis in the irritable bowel syndrome: a five year prospective study. Lancet. 1987;1:963-5.
3.Kellow JE, Phillips SF, Miller IJ, et al. Dysmotility of the small intestine in irritable bowel syndrome. Gut. 1988;29:1236-43.
4.Mertz H, Morgan V, Tanner G, et al. Regional cerebral activation in irritable bowel syndrome and control subjects with painful and non-painful rectal distention. Gastroenterology. 200;118:842-8.
5.Gwee KA, Leong YL, Graham C, et al. Psychometric scores and the persistence of irritable bowel after infectious diarrhoea. Lancet. 1996;347:150-3.
6.Rodriguez LA, Ruigomez A. Increased risk of irritable bowel syndrome after bacterial gastroenteritis. BMJ. 1999;318:565-6.
7.Thompson WG, Longstreth GF, Drossman DA, et al. Functional bowel disorders and functional abdominal pain. Gut.1999;45(suppl II):1143-7.
8.American College of Gastroenterology Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders Task Force. Evidence-based position statement on the management of irritable bowel syndrome in North America. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;97:11(suppl):S1-5.
9.Sanders DS, Carter MJ, Hurlstone DP, et al. Association of adult celiac disease with irritable bowel syndrome: a case control study in patients fulfilling ROME II criteria referred to secondary care. Lancet. 2001;358:1604-8.
10.Brandt LJ, Bjorkman D, Fennerty MB, et al. Systematic review on the management of irritable bowel syndrome in North America. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;97:11(suppl):S7-26.
11.Bowser A. Melatonin relieves IBS symptoms in patients with sleep disorders. Gastroenterology & Endoscopy News. 2005;56:12.
12.Thompson WG, Longstreth GF, Drossman DA, Heaton KW, et al. Functional bowel disorders and functional abdominal pain. Gut. 1999;45(suppl 2):1143-7.
13.Ward SM. Interstial cells of Cajal in enteric neurotransmission. Gut. 2000;47(suppl 4):iv40-3.
14.Adeniji OA, DiPalma JA. Prevalence of medication-associated constipation. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;96:SI40.
15.American Gastroenterological Association Clinical Practice Committee. AGA technical review on irritable bowel syndrome. Gastroenterology 2002;123:2108-31.
16.Shafik A, Shafik AA, El-Sibai O, Ahmed I. Colonic pacing; a therapeutic option for the treatment of constipation due to total colonic inertia.
17.Lubowski DZ, Chen FC, Kennedy ML, King DW. Results of colectomy for slow transit constipation. Dis Colon Rectum. 1999;39:23-9.

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

A safe place for adhesion sufferers on Facebook

There are predators in the world of Adheion Related Disorder we offer this facebook page as a safe and uncensored  to meet and talk and find unbiased education about adhesion's.
Remember we are sufferers too and we will never profit from your pain and suffering.

Please visit our new facebook page
http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=100002960705092

Performing clinical studies involving hernia mesh devices: what every investigator should know about the FDA investigational device exemption (IDE) process.

Hernia. 2011 Sep 11. [Epub ahead of print]


Performing clinical studies involving hernia mesh devices: what every investigator should know about the FDA investigational device exemption (IDE) process.

Ashar BS, Dang JM, Krause D, Luke MC.

SourceOffice of Device Evaluation, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, US Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Avenue, WO 66, Room 422, Silver Spring, MD, 20850, USA, Binita.Ashar@fda.hhs.gov.



Abstract

The FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) is responsible for providing reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness of all medical devices marketed within the US. To date, CDRH has cleared numerous hernia mesh devices for general use, but has not cleared/approved any mesh devices intended for certain specific uses, such as for infected wounds, hernia prevention, biofilm reduction, or prevention of adhesions. CDRH is requesting that manufacturers seeking specific hernia mesh device labeling claims consult with the Agency to determine the level of evidence necessary for justifying such claims.



PMID:21909977[PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21909977

Adhesions, Adhesions-Related Disorder or CAPPS – a way to think about the problem from the patient’s perspective.

http://www.adhesions.org/whatsnew.htm#CAPPS
Dallas TX. June 11 2010. The International Adhesions Society (IAS) is proud to post on its adhesions.org web site the results of groundbreaking and innovative research which will forever change the way the problem of adhesions is viewed.

The paper was published after Dr. Wiseman was invited to submit a manuscript for inclusion in a special volume of “Seminars in Reproductive Medicine” on the subject of adhesions. The paper is entitled: “Disorders of Adhesions or Adhesion-Related Disorder: Monolithic Entities or Part of Something Bigger—CAPPS? “ (click here for .pdf)

Since forming the International Adhesions Society (IAS) in 1996, it became increasingly obvious that the problems of patients suffering from adhesions were not just about adhesions. Accordingly, we were the first to coin the term “Adhesion Related Disorder” (ARD) to include the entire complex of pain, infertility, obstruction, nutrition, psychological and social issues that ARD sufferers and their families experience.

Based on formal patient surveys as well as thousands of emails and phone calls from patients, it became apparent to us that even the term ARD may be inadequate to address the problem. In reality, the ARD patient is part of a much larger group of patients who, in varying degrees, combinations and sequences experience a range of symptoms and conditions including endometriosis, interstitial cystitis (IC), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), bowel obstruction and chronic abdominal and/or pelvic pain.

Although ‘‘adhesions’’ may start out as a single, stand-alone entity, an adhesions patient may develop a number of related conditions (ARD) which renders those patients practically indistinguishable from patients with multiple symptoms originating from other abdominal or pelvic conditions. (continued)

Click here for a pdf copy of the entire press release.

Click here for a .pdf copy of the CAPPS article