Use of icodextrin 4% solution in the reduction of adhesion formation after gynaecological surgery

The Future of Adhesion Prophylaxis Trials in Abdominal Surgery: An Expert Global Consensus

Postoperative adhesions represent a frequent complication of abdominal surgery. Adhesions can result from infection, ischemia, and foreign body reaction, but commonly develop after any surgical procedure. The morbidity caused by adhesions affects quality of life and, therefore, it is paramount to continue to raise awareness and scientific recognition of the burden of adhesions in healthcare and clinical research. This 2021 Global Expert Consensus Group worked together to produce consented statements to guide future clinical research trials and advise regulatory authorities. It is critical to harmonize the expectations of research, to both develop and bring to market improved anti-adhesion therapies, with the ultimate, shared goal of improved patient outcomes.

Peritoneal Adhesions and their Prevention - Current Trends

The development of adhesions after gynecologic surgery is a severe problem with ramifications that go beyond the medical complications patients suffer (which most often include pain, obstruction and infertility), since they also impose a huge financial burden on the health care system and increase the workload of surgeons and all personnel involved in surgical follow-up care. Surgical techniques to avoid adhesion formation have not proven to be sufficient and pharmaceutical approaches for their prevention are even less effective, which means that the use of adhesion prevention devices is essential for achieving decent prophylaxis. This review explores the wide range of adhesion prevention products currently available on the market. Particular emphasis is put on prospective randomized controlled clinical trials that include second-look interventions, as these offer the most solid evidence of efficacy. We focused on adhesion scores, which are the most common way to quantify adhesion formation. This enables a direct comparison of the efficacies of different devices. While the greatest amount of data are available for oxidized regenerated cellulose, the outcomes with this adhesion barrier are mediocre and several studies have shown little efficacy. The best results have been achieved using adhesion barriers based on either modified starch, i.e., 4DryField® PH (PlantTec Medical GmbH, Lüneburg, Germany), or expanded polytetrafluoroethylene, i.e., GoreTex (W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc., Medical Products Division, Flagstaff, AZ), albeit the latter, as a non-resorbable barrier, has a huge disadvantage of having to be surgically removed again. Therefore, 4DryField® PH currently appears to be a promising approach and further studies are recommended.

Advancement of Biomaterial-Based Postoperative Adhesion Barriers

Postoperative peritoneal adhesion (PPA) is a prevalent incidence that generally happens during the healing process of traumatized tissues. It causes multiple severe complications such as intestinal obstruction, chronic abdominal pain, and female infertility. To prevent PPA, several antiadhesion materials and drug delivery systems composed of biomaterials are used clinically, and clinical antiadhesive is one of the important applications nowadays. In addition to several commercially available materials, like film, spray, injectable hydrogel, powder, or solution type have been energetically studied based on natural and synthetic biomaterials such as alginate, hyaluronan, cellulose, starch, chondroitin sulfate, polyethylene glycol, polylactic acid, etc. Moreover, many kinds of animal adhesion models, such as cecum abrasion models and unitary horn models, are developed to evaluate new materials' efficacy. A new animal adhesion model based on hepatectomy and conventional animal adhesion models is recently developed and a new adhesion barrier by this new model is also developed. In summary, many kinds of materials and animal models are studied; thus, it is quite important to overview this field's current progress. Here, PPA is reviewed in terms of the species of biomaterials and animal models and several problems to be solved to develop better antiadhesion materials in the future are discussed.

Epidemiology and Prevention of Postsurgical Adhesions Revisited

OBJECTIVE

To provide a comprehensive review of recent epidemiologic data on the burden of adhesion-related complications and adhesion prevention. Second, we elaborate on economic considerations for the application of antiadhesion barriers.

BACKGROUND

Because the landmark SCAR studies elucidated the impact of adhesions on readmissions for long-term complications of abdominal surgery, adhesions are widely recognized as one of the most common causes for complications after abdominal surgery. Concurrently, interest in adhesion prevention revived and several new antiadhesion barriers were developed. Although these barriers have now been around for more than a decade, adhesion prevention is still seldom applied.

METHODS

The first part of this article is a narrative review evaluating the results of recent epidemiological studies on adhesion-related complications and adhesion prevention. In part II, these epidemiological data are translated into a cost model of adhesion-related complications and the potential cost-effectiveness of antiadhesion barriers is explored.

RESULTS

New epidemiologic data warrant a shift in our understanding of the socioeconomic burden of adhesion-related complications and the indications for adhesion prevention strategies. Increasing evidence from cohort studies and systematic reviews shows that difficulties during reoperations, rather than small bowel obstructions, account for the majority of adhesion-related morbidity. Laparoscopy and antiadhesion barriers have proven to reduce adhesion formation and related morbidity. The direct health care costs associated with treatment of adhesion-related complications within the first 5 years after surgery are $2350 following open surgery and $970 after laparoscopy. Costs are about 50% higher in fertile-age female patients. Application of an antiadhesion barriers could save between $328 and $680 after open surgery. After laparoscopy, the costs impact ranges from $82 in expenses to $63 of savings.

CONCLUSIONS

Adhesions are an important cause for long-term complications in both open and laparoscopic surgery. Adhesiolysis during reoperations seems to impact adhesion-related morbidity most. Routine application of antiadhesion barriers in open surgery is safe and cost-effective. Application of antiadhesion barriers can be cost-effective in selected cases of laparoscopy. More research is needed to develop barriers suitable for laparoscopic use.

Comparison of 2 Different Barrier Solutions (icodextrin 4% vs. dextran 70) used as Adhesion-prevention Agents after Microsurgical Adnexal Operations

In this prospective randomized clinical trial, 2 different barrier solutions (icodextrin 4% vs. dextran 70) were compared with regard to their antiadhesive properties, their tolerance and their persistence in situ. To this end, 45 patients suffering from infertility due to adnexal adhesions with indication for microsurgical adhesiolysis were randomized to 2 treatment groups. In advance of abdominal closure, patients were randomized to receive either 1,000 mL of icodextrin 4% solution (n = 23) or 300 mL dextran 70 instillation (n = 22). Serial transvaginal ultrasonographic scans were conducted on days 1, 3, 5 and 7 after surgery to measure the remaining volumes of each barrier solution. Seven days after initial surgery, a second-look laparoscopy was performed; remaining fluids were aspirated and measured and adhesions were rescored (final adhesion score). Differences between treatment groups were not significant (p = 0.775). With regard to their tolerance, the advantages of the icodextrin 4% solution became obvious, as edema of vulva and abdomen occurred more frequently after dextran 70 instillation.

In conclusion, microsurgical adhesiolysis and application of icodextrin 4% solution or dextran 70 as adhesion-prevention agent resulted in reduction of incidence, extent and severity of adhesions. Both solutions were well tolerated.

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

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.

Adhesion-preventing properties of 4% icodextrin and canola oil: a comparative experimental study

OBJECTIVE

Postsurgical abdominal adhesions are common, serious postoperative complications. The present study compared the usefulness of 4% icodextrin and canola oil in preventing postoperative peritoneal adhesions.

METHODS

Twenty-four Wistar albino rats were divided into three groups. Following a laparotomy, a serosal abrasion was made by brushing the cecum, and 3 mL of 0.9% NaCl, 4% icodextrin, or 3 mL of canola oil were intraperitoneally administered for the control, icodextrin, and canola oil groups, respectively. The abdomen was then closed. All of the rats were sacrificed at day 10. Macroscopic, histopathological, and biochemical evaluations were performed. The results were statistically analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and ANOVA tests.

RESULTS

Macroscopic analyses revealed that both canola oil and 4% icodextrin reduced adhesion formation, but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.17). The histopathological examinations revealed no significant differences in terms of giant cell, lymphocyte/plasmocyte, neutrophil, ICAM1, or PECAM1 scores. However, both canola oil and 4% icodextrin significantly reduced fibrosis (p = 0.025). In the canola oil group, the histiocytic reactions were significantly increased (p = 0.001), and the hydroxyproline levels were significantly lower than those in the other groups (p = 0.034).

CONCLUSIONS

In the present study, canola oil was determined to be superior to 4% icodextrin in lowering hydroxyproline levels and increasing histiocytic reactions. Considering these results, we believe that canola oil is a promising agent for preventing adhesion formation.

[Postoperative abdominal adhesions and their prevention in gynaecological surgery: II. How can they be prevented?]

This paper is the second of a two-part publication. The initial paper provided a comprehensive overview of the evidence on adhesions to allow gynaecological surgeons to be best informed on adhesions, their development, impact on patients, health systems and surgical outcomes. There is rising evidence that surgeons can take important steps to reduce the burden of adhesions. In this second paper, we review the various strategies to reduce the impact of adhesions, improve surgical outcomes and provide some practical proposals for action on adhesions. As well as improvements in surgical technique, developments in adhesion-reduction strategies and new agents offer a realistic possibility of reducing adhesion formation and improving outcomes for patients. They should be considered for use particularly in high-risk surgery and in patients with adhesiogenic conditions. Further research into new strategies to prevent adhesions more effectively through an improved surgical environment, new and combination devices and pharmacological agents should be encouraged. Formal recommendations would ensure better prioritisation of adhesion-reduction within the French health system. Patients should also be better informed of the risks of adhesions.

Prevention of intra-peritoneal adhesions in gynaecological surgery: theory and evidence

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. Limited data support the administration of post-operative corticosteroids in addition to systemic intra-operative corticosteroids for the prevention of adhesions after gynaecological surgery. None of the remaining pharmacological agents have been found effective for the reduction of post-operative adhesions. 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. The separation can be achieved by solid barriers or fluids. 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.

Prevention of intra-abdominal adhesions in gynaecological surgery

Important progress has been made in the field of post-surgical adhesion prevention with the development of consensus statements in gynaecology from the United Kingdom, Germany, the European Society of Gynaecological Endoscopy, Call for Action in Colorectal Surgery and a recent Technical Bulletin from The Practice Committee of the American Society of Reproductive Medicine. These reports suggest that the application of adhesion reduction devices together with the use of microsurgical principles reduces the formation of post-operative adhesions. This commentary provides additional information to assist gynaecologists in making surgical decisions. However, variation in adhesion classifications, mode of device application, lack of uniformity in surgical approaches and variations in interpretation of results make comparative assessment of the efficacy of adhesion reduction devices and surgical techniques difficult. Considering the choice of an adhesion-reduction device, one has to evaluate the cost and its clinical impact carefully. This is particularly important if one were to support routine, prophylactic use of adhesion-reduction devices. Healthcare providers should take into account the needs of individual patients, available resources, and institutional or clinical practice limitations. Good surgical technique and perhaps the use of approved devices for adhesion reduction would give patients the best chance to benefit from reproductive and gynaecological surgery.

Safety of carboxymethylcellulose/polyethylene oxide for the prevention of adhesions in lumbar disc herniation--consecutive case series review

BACKGROUND

Epidural fibrosis is regarded as a cause of failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) when excessive adhesional/fibrotic scar tissue causes compression, pain or discomfort by tethering of nerve tissue to the surrounding muscle or bone. Fibrosis inhibitors could therefore increase the success rate of spinal surgery and decrease the need for reoperations. In recent years, bio-resorbable gels or films for the prevention of peridural fibrosis and post-operative adhesions have been developed that look clinically promising. This included a 100% synthetic, sterile, absorbable gel combinations of carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) and polyethylene oxide (PEO) used to coat the dura to reduce scarring after discectomy which became available in Europe in 2002. However, given the burden of the problem and unfavorable experience with other types of adhesion-reduction agents, our unit decided to evaluate the safety of CMC/PEO in a large population of patients undergoing spinal microdiscectomy for herniation.

METHODS

To determine the safety and assess efficacy of carboxymethylcellulose/polyethylene oxide (CMC/PEO) gel as an anti-adhesion gel, a consecutive series of 396 patients undergoing lumbar discectomy performed by one surgeon had CMC/PEO gel administered at the end of surgery. The patients were followed up in accordance with standard clinical practice and records reviewed for side effects, such as skin reactions, general reactions or local fluid collections. Reoperations for recurrent herniation included an evaluation of fibrosis reduction.

RESULTS

No product related complications were observed. Five patients needed reoperations for recurrent herniation. Significant but subjective reduction in fibrosis was observed in these patients.

CONCLUSION

The findings provide confidence that CMC/PEO gel is well tolerated as an agent to achieve reduction of fibrosis in lumbar disc surgery. Further formal prospective study is recommended in this area of unmet need.

Gross vulval edema after laparoscopic instillation of 4% icodextrin solution

Severe vulval edema after laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy with instillation of adhesion-prevention solution (4% icodextrin) is a rare complication. A 17-year-old girl was readmitted to the hospital 2 days after laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy with massive vulval swelling, pain, and anxiety. Gross swelling was potentially caused by accumulation of fluid 4% icodextrin in the labia. The condition resolved spontaneously with application of ice packs and bed rest. Possible mechanisms of this complication are discussed as is the importance of adequate counseling and consent before surgery when adhesion prevention solutions are to be administered.

Impact of adhesions in colorectal surgery

The extent of the problem of adhesions is considerable and poses a significant burden on healthcare systems, the workload of surgeons and the lives of patients. This paper reviews the work undertaken and the associated evidence for the impact of adhesions. It considers the various options and strategies to reduce adhesions alongside the fundamental necessity for good surgical technique.

Adept (icodextrin 4% solution) reduces adhesions after laparoscopic surgery for adhesiolysis: a double-blind, randomized, controlled study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Adept (4% icodextrin solution) in reducing adhesions after laparoscopic gynecological surgery involving adhesiolysis.

DESIGN

Multicenter, prospective, randomized, double-blind study comparing Adept with lactated Ringer's solution (LRS).

PATIENT(S)

Four hundred two patients randomized intraoperatively to Adept (n = 203) or LRS (n = 199) returned for second laparoscopy within 4-8 weeks. Incidence, severity, and extent of adhesions were determined on both occasions.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

The primary efficacy measure defined by the Food and Drug Administration was the number of patients achieving clinical success with adhesion treatment. Other measures included incidence and American Fertility Society (AFS) scores.

RESULT(S)

Significantly more Adept patients achieved clinical success than did LRS patients (49% vs. 38%). In infertility patients, Adept demonstrated particular clinical success compared with LRS (55% vs. 33%). This was reflected in the number of patients with a reduced AFS score (53% vs. 30%) and in fewer patients with a moderate/severe AFS category score (43% vs. 14%). Safety was comparable in both groups. Most events were related to the surgery, with an increase in transient labial edema in the Adept group.

CONCLUSION(S)

This is the first randomized, double-blind trial of an adhesion reduction agent. It demonstrated that Adept is a safe and effective adhesion reduction agent in laparoscopy.

Disseminated intravascular coagulation after laparoscopic multiple myomectomy with use of icodextrin: a case report

Uterine leiomyomas are by far the most common benign genital tumors. The prevalence rates vary from 20% to 50%. Myomectomy is a standard surgical treatment and is prescribed for patients who wish to preserve their fertility. The laparoscopic approach allows a shorter hospital stay, faster recovery, less intraoperative blood loss, less postoperative pain, and possibly fewer adhesions than abdominal myomectomy when performed by skilled surgeons. Myomectomy is associated with the risk of excessive blood loss and adhesions formation. Reports of disseminated intravascular coagulation complicating this type of surgery are rare, and no prior cases have been reported in the literature after the use of 4% icodextrin. Randomized trials support the use of absorbable adhesion barriers to reduce adhesion formation. A case of disseminated intravascular coagulation after laparoscopic multiple myomectomy with the use of 4% icodextrin solution is described.