medigraphic.com

2006, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Cir Cir 2006; 74 (1)

Effect of hyaluronic acid on ureteropyelic anastomosis healing. Experimental study

Ramírez-Barba EJ, Quiroz-Guerrero JJ, Báez-Mendoza J, Martínez-García J

Language: Spanish
References: 32
Page: 41-46
PDF size: 141.07 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Background: Ureteropyelic obstruction is the most frequent congenital cause of obstructive uropathy in the newborn. Its repair is based on surgical procedures and has a very high rate of relapse of secondary stenosis to fibrosis (5-12 %) in open repair and 10-20 % in endo-urological pyeloplasties. Hyaluronic acid has demonstrated therapeutic utility in modulating the healing process and its effect in scar formation from ureteropyelic anastomosis is determined.
Methods: An experimental, controlled, comparative, double blind study was performed. Sample n = 20 per protocol with δ = 26 %, α = 0.05, Β = 0.80. Two groups of Wistar rats, 4 months of age and weighing between 250 and 350 g, were used. Under general anesthesia, Vision 12x was used and bevel section was realized in the left ureteropyelic union and end-to-end anastomosis with Vicryl 7-0. Experimental group was treated with 25 µg of hyaluronic acid and group B was treated with placebo. The rats were reoperated on the 15th day and adherences in cavity were quantified. To quantify the degree of fibrosis, samples of ureteropyelic anastomosis tissue were dyed with Masson Trichrome and observed microscopically. Inferential statistics were used with α = 0.05.
Results: Macroscopic: there were adherences in 75 % of group A and 90 % of the group B (p ›0.05). Microscopic: anastomotic fibrosis in group A (534 ± 292 µ) was significantly lower (p = 0.043) than that of group B (728 ± 295 µ).
Conclusions: Hyaluronic acid plays a role in diminishing the formation of fibrosis from ureteropyelic anastomosis in an animal model.


REFERENCES

  1. Steinhardt GF. Ureteropelvic junction obstruction. In: Edmont TG, ed. Pediatric Urology Practice;1999. pp. 181-204.

  2. Floyd JW, Hendren WH. Reoperative pyeloplasty: experience with 22 cases. J Urol 1990;143:275A.

  3. Persky L, McDougal WS, Kedia K. Management of initial pyeloplasty failure. J Urol 1981;125:695-697.

  4. 4.Wolpert JJ, Woodard JR, Parrot TS. Pyeloplasty in the young infant. J Urol 1989;142(2 pt 2):573-575.

  5. Kavoussi LR, Meretyk S, Dierks SM, et al. Endopyelotomy for secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children. J Urol 1999;145(2):345-349.

  6. Longaker MT, Chiu ES, Adzick NS, Stern M, Harrison MR, Stern R. Studies in fetal wound healing. V. A prolonged presence of hyaluronic acid characterizes fetal wound fluid. Ann Surg 1991;213(4):292-296.

  7. Harrison MR, Adzick NS. The fetus as a patient: surgical considerations. Ann Surg 1991;213(4):279-291.

  8. 8.Dado DV, Kernahan DA, Gianopoulos JG. Intrauterine repair of cleft lip: what’s involved. Plast Reconst Surg 1990;85(3):461-465.

  9. Dostal GH, Gamelli RL. Fetal wound healing. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1993;176(3):299-306.

  10. DePalma RL, Krummel TM, Durham LA 3rd, et al. Characterization and quantitation of wound matrix in the fetal rabbit. Matrix 1989;9(3):224-231.

  11. Lehninger AL. Biochemistry. 2nd ed. New York: VG Worth Publishers; 1977. pp. 249-277.

  12. Montgomery RT. Biochemistry. 4th ed. St. Louis: C.V. Mosby;1983. pp. 321-392.

  13. Longaker MT, Chiu ES, Harrison MR, et al. Studies in fetal wound healing. IV. Hyaluronic acid-stimulating activity distinguishes fetal wound fluid from adult wound fluid. Ann Surg 1989;210(5):667-672.

  14. Longaker MT, Harrison MR, Crombleholme TM, et al. Studies in fetal wound healing. I. A factor in fetal serum that stimulates deposition of hyaluronic acid. J Pediatr Surg 1989;24(8):789-792.

  15. Longaker MT, Adzick NS, Hall JL, et al. Studies in fetal wound healing. VII. Fetal wound healing may be modulated by hyaluronic acid stimulating activity in amniotic fluid. J Pediatr Surg 1990;25(4):430-433.

  16. Mast BA, Haynes JH, Krummel TM, Diegelmann RF, Cohen IK. In vivo degradation of fetal wound hyaluronic acid results in increased fibroplasia, collagen deposition, and neovascularization. Plast Reconstr Surg 1992;89(3):503-509.

  17. Hunt TK, Twomey P, Zederfeldt B, Dunphy JE. Respiratory gas tensions and pH in healing wounds. Am J Surg 1967;114(2):302-307.

  18. Estes JM, Adzick NS, Harrison MR, Longaker MT, Stern R. Hyaluronate metabolism undergoes an ontogenic transition during fetal development: implications for scar-free wound healing. J Pediatr Surg 1993;28(10):1227-1231.

  19. Goa KL, Benfield P. Hyaluronic acid. A review of its pharmacology and use as surgical aid in ophthalmology, and its therapeutic potential in joint disease and wound healing. Drugs 1994;47(3):536-566.

  20. Soldati D. Rahm F. Pasche P. Mucosal wound healing after nasal surgery. A controlled clinical trial on the efficacy of hyaluronic acid containing cream. Drugs Exp Clin Res 1999;25(6):253-261.

  21. Chauvin K, Bratton C, Parkins C. Healing large tympanic membrane perforations using hyaluronic acid, basic fibroblast growth factor, and epidermal growth factor. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1999;121(1):43-47.

  22. Sasaki T, Watanabe C. Stimulation of osteoinduction in bone wound healing by high-molecular hyaluronic acid. Bone 1995;16(1):9-15. 23. Evrard VA, De Bellis A, Boeckx W, Brosens IA. Peritoneal healing after fibrin glue application: a comparative study in a rat model. Hum Reprod 1996;11(9):1877-1880.

  23. Da Silva EA, Sampaio FJ, Dornas MC, Damaio R, Cardoso LE. Extracellular matrix changes in urethral stricture disease. J Urol 2002;168(2):805-807.

  24. Kramer K, Senninger N, Herbst H, Probst W. Effective prevention of adhesions with hyaluronate. Arch Surg 2002;137(3):278-282.

  25. Sawada T, Hasegawa K, Tsukada K, Kawakami S. Adhesion preventive effect of hyaluronic acid after intraperitoneal surgery in mice. Hum Reprod 1999;14(6):1470-1472.

  26. Rodgers KE, Johns DB, Girgis W, Campeau J, di Zerega GS. Reduction of adhesion formation with hyaluronic acid after peritoneal surgery in rabbits. Fertil Steril 1997;67(3):553-558.

  27. Gettman MT, Lotan Y, Roerhborn CG, Cadeddu JA, Pearle MS. Costeffective treatment for ureteropelvic junction obstruction: a decision tree analysis. J Urol 2003;169(1):228-232.

  28. Thomas R, Monga M. Endopyelotomy. Retrograde ureteroscopic approach. Urol Clin North Am 1998;25(2):305-310.

  29. Gupta M, Tuncay OL, Smith AD. Open surgical exploration after failed endopyelotomy: a 12-year perspective. J Urol 1997;157(5):1613-1618.

  30. Van Cangh PJ, Wilmart JF, Opsomer RJ, Abi-Aad A, Wese FX, Lorge F. Long-term results and late recurrence after endoureteropyelotomy: a critical analysis of prognostic factors. J Urol 1994;151(4):934-937.

  31. Chow GK, Geisinger MA, Streem SB. Endopyelotomy outcome as a function of high versus dependent ureteral insertion. Urology 1999;54 (6):999-1002.

  32. Shalhav AL, Giusti G, Elbahnasy AM, et al. Endopyelotomy for highinsertion ureteropelvic junction obstruction. J Endourol 1998;12(2):127-131.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com