Послеоперационные спайки – важное осложнение абдоминальной хирургии. Большинство стратегий по их предупреждению в оперативной гинекологии сфокусированы на оптимизации использования хирургической техники противоспаечных барьеров, которые делятся на 2 категории: фармакологические агенты и барьеры. Хирургическая техника, которая минимизирует перитонеальную травму, может уменьшить, но не предотвратить формирование послеоперационных спаек. Разные местные и системные лекарства могут уменьшить локальный воспалительный ответ, подавить коагуляционный каскад и способствовать фибринолизу. Барьеры общепринято рассматриваются как наиболее успешные помощники, способные редуцировать развитие спаек. Они разъединяют травмированные поверхности в период заживления. Существует ограниченное количество рандомизированных клинических испытаний, подтверждающих эффект большинства этих агентов в предотвращении интраперитонеальных адгезий после гинекологических операций. Тем не менее нельзя сделать окончательные заключения, и будущие исследования в этой области оправданны.
Post-operative adhesions are a significant complication of all abdominal surgical procedures. The major strategies for adhesion prevention in gynaecological surgery are focused on the optimization of surgical technique and use of anti-adhesive agents, which fall into two main categories: pharmacological agents and barriers. Surgical technique that minimizes peritoneal trauma can reduce, but cannot prevent post-operative adhesion formation. Various local and systemic drugs that can alter the local inflammatory response, inhibit the coagulation cascade and promote fibrinolysis have been evaluated. Barriers are currently considered the most useful adjuncts, which may reduce adhesion formation. They act by separating the traumatized peritoneal surfaces during the healing period. There is limited evidence from randomized clinical trials that support the beneficial effect of most of these barrier agents in the prevention of intra-peritoneal adhesions after gynaecological surgery. However, the evidence is not adequate for definite conclusions to be drawn and further research in this field is warranted.
1. Diamond MP, Daniell J, Johns D et al. Postoperative adhesion development after operative laparoscopy: evaluation at early second look procedures. Fertil Steril 1991; 55: 700.
2. Pouly JL, Seak-San S. Adhesions: laparoscopy versus laparotomy. In: G.S.diZerega, (Ed.): Peritoneal surgery. New York, Springer-Verlag, 2006; p. 183–92.
3. American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Pathogenesis, consequences and control of peritoneal adhesions in gynaecologic surgery. Fertil Steril 2007; 88: 21–6.
4. Ott DE. Laparoscopy and tribology: the effect of laparoscopic gas on peritoneal fluid. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 2001; 8: 117–23.
5. Gray RI, Ott DE, Henderson AC et al. Severe local hypothermia from laparoscopic gas evaporative jet cooling: a mechanism to explain clinical observations. JSLS 1999; 3: 171–7.
6. Hazebroek EJ, Schreve MA, Visser P et al. Impact of temperature and humidity of carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum on body temperature and peritoneal morphology. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 2002; 12: 355–64.
7. Ordemann J, Jakob J, Braumann C et al. Morphology of the rat peritoneum after carbon dioxide and helium pneumoperitoneum: a scanning electron microscopic study. Surg Endosc 2004; 18: 1389–93.
8. Koninckx PR, Molinas R, Binda MM. Профилактика послеоперационных спаек. Проблемы репродукции. 2009; 3: 26–33.
9. Molinas CR, Binda MM, Koninckx PR. Angiogenic factors in peritoneal adhesion formation. Gynecol Surg 2006; 3: 157–67.
10. Molinas CR, Campo R, Dewerchin M et al. Role of vascular endothelial growth factor and placental growth factor in basal adhesion formation and in carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum-enhanced adhesion formation after laparoscopic surgery in transgenic mice. Fertil Steril (Suppl. 2) 2003; 80: 803–11.
________________________________________________
1. Diamond MP, Daniell J, Johns D et al. Postoperative adhesion development after operative laparoscopy: evaluation at early second look procedures. Fertil Steril 1991; 55: 700.
2. Pouly JL, Seak-San S. Adhesions: laparoscopy versus laparotomy. In: G.S.diZerega, (Ed.): Peritoneal surgery. New York, Springer-Verlag, 2006; p. 183–92.
3. American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Pathogenesis, consequences and control of peritoneal adhesions in gynaecologic surgery. Fertil Steril 2007; 88: 21–6.
4. Ott DE. Laparoscopy and tribology: the effect of laparoscopic gas on peritoneal fluid. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 2001; 8: 117–23.
5. Gray RI, Ott DE, Henderson AC et al. Severe local hypothermia from laparoscopic gas evaporative jet cooling: a mechanism to explain clinical observations. JSLS 1999; 3: 171–7.
6. Hazebroek EJ, Schreve MA, Visser P et al. Impact of temperature and humidity of carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum on body temperature and peritoneal morphology. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 2002; 12: 355–64.
7. Ordemann J, Jakob J, Braumann C et al. Morphology of the rat peritoneum after carbon dioxide and helium pneumoperitoneum: a scanning electron microscopic study. Surg Endosc 2004; 18: 1389–93.
8. Koninckx PR, Molinas R, Binda MM. Профилактика послеоперационных спаек. Проблемы репродукции. 2009; 3: 26–33.
9. Molinas CR, Binda MM, Koninckx PR. Angiogenic factors in peritoneal adhesion formation. Gynecol Surg 2006; 3: 157–67.
10. Molinas CR, Campo R, Dewerchin M et al. Role of vascular endothelial growth factor and placental growth factor in basal adhesion formation and in carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum-enhanced adhesion formation after laparoscopic surgery in transgenic mice. Fertil Steril (Suppl. 2) 2003; 80: 803–11.
Авторы
С.О.Дубровина
Ростовский научно-исследовательский институт акушерства и педиатрии Минздрава РФ;
ГБОУ ВПО Ростовский государственный медицинский университет Минздрава РФ