• We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
Logo of annsurgLink to Publisher's site
Ann Surg. Mar 1996; 223(3): 242–248.
PMCID: PMC1235111

Foreign material in postoperative adhesions.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The authors determined the prevalence of foreign body granulomas in intra-abdominal adhesions in patients with a history of abdominal surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a cross-sectional, multicenter, multinational study, adult patients with a history of one or more previous abdominal operations and scheduled for laparotomy between 1991 and 1993 were examined during surgery. Patients in whom adhesions were present were selected for study. Quantity, distribution, and quality of adhesions were scored, and adhesion samples were taken for histologic examination. RESULTS: In 448 studied patients, the adhesions were most frequently attached to the omentum (68%) and the small bowel (67%). The amount of adhesions was significantly smaller in patients with a history of only one minor operation or one major operation, compared with those with multiple laparotomies (p < 0.001). Significantly more adhesions were found in patients with a history of adhesions at previous laparotomy (p < 0.001), with presence of abdominal abscess, hematoma, and intestinal leakage as complications after former surgery (p = 0.01, p = 0.002, and p < 0.001, respectively), and with a history of an unoperated inflammatory process (p = 0.04). Granulomas were found in 26% of all patients. Suture granulomas were found in 25% of the patients. Starch granulomas were present in 5% of the operated patients whose surgeons wore starch-containing gloves. When suture granulomas were present, the median interval between the present and the most recent previous laparotomy was 13 months. When suture granulomas were absent, this interval was significantly longer--i.e., 30 months (p = 0.002). The percentage of patients with suture granulomas decreased gradually from 37% if the previous laparotomy had occurred up to 6 months before the present operation, to 18% if the previous laparotomy had occurred more than 2 years ago (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The number of adhesions found at laparotomy was significantly larger in patients with a history of multiple laparotomies, unoperated intra-abdominal inflammatory disease, and previous postoperative intra-abdominal complications, and when adhesions were already present at previous laparotomy. In recent adhesions, suture granulomas occurred in a large percentage. This suggests that the intra-abdominal presence of foreign material is an important cause of adhesion formation. Therefore intra-abdominal contamination with foreign material should be minimized.

Full text

Full text is available as a scanned copy of the original print version. Get a printable copy (PDF file) of the complete article (1.1M), or click on a page image below to browse page by page. Links to PubMed are also available for Selected References.

Images in this article

Click on the image to see a larger version.

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Ellis H. The causes and prevention of intestinal adhesions. Br J Surg. 1982 May;69(5):241–243. [PubMed]
  • Menzies D, Ellis H. Intestinal obstruction from adhesions--how big is the problem? Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1990 Jan;72(1):60–63. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Menzies D. Peritoneal adhesions. Incidence, cause, and prevention. Surg Annu. 1992;24(Pt 1):27–45. [PubMed]
  • McEntee G, Pender D, Mulvin D, McCullough M, Naeeder S, Farah S, Badurdeen MS, Ferraro V, Cham C, Gillham N, et al. Current spectrum of intestinal obstruction. Br J Surg. 1987 Nov;74(11):976–980. [PubMed]
  • Keeman JN. Recidiverende obstructie-ileus door adhesies. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 1987 Aug 29;131(35):1509–1512. [PubMed]
  • Fayez JA. An assessment of the role of operative laparoscopy in tuboplasty. Fertil Steril. 1983 Apr;39(4):476–479. [PubMed]
  • Hershlag A, Diamond MP, DeCherney AH. Adhesiolysis. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1991 Jun;34(2):395–402. [PubMed]
  • Ellis H. The cause and prevention of postoperative intraperitoneal adhesions. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1971 Sep;133(3):497–511. [PubMed]
  • Almdahl SM, Burhol PG. Peritoneal adhesions: causes and prevention. Dig Dis. 1990;8(1):37–44. [PubMed]
  • Myllärniemi H, Frilander M, Turunen M, Saxén L. The effect of glove powders and their constituents on adhesion and granuloma formation in the abdominal cavity of the rabbit. Acta Chir Scand. 1966 Apr;131(4):312–318. [PubMed]
  • Ellis H. The hazards of surgical glove dusting powders. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1990 Dec;171(6):521–527. [PubMed]
  • Down RH, Whitehead R, Watts JM. Do surgical packs cause peritoneal adhesions? Aust N Z J Surg. 1979 Jun;49(3):379–382. [PubMed]
  • Holtz G. Adhesion induction by suture of varying tissue reactivity and caliber. Int J Fertil. 1982;27(3):134–135. [PubMed]
  • Elkins TE, Stovall TG, Warren J, Ling FW, Meyer NL. A histologic evaluation of peritoneal injury and repair: implications for adhesion formation. Obstet Gynecol. 1987 Aug;70(2):225–228. [PubMed]
  • Saxén L, Myllärniemi H. Foreign material and postoperative adhesions. N Engl J Med. 1968 Jul 25;279(4):200–202. [PubMed]
  • McEntee GP, Stuart RC, Byrne PJ, Leen E, Hennessy TP. Experimental study of starch-induced intraperitoneal adhesions. Br J Surg. 1990 Oct;77(10):1113–1114. [PubMed]
  • Jagelman DG, Ellis H. Starch and intraperitoneal adhesion formation. Br J Surg. 1973 Feb;60(2):111–114. [PubMed]
  • Weibel MA, Majno G. Peritoneal adhesions and their relation to abdominal surgery. A postmortem study. Am J Surg. 1973 Sep;126(3):345–353. [PubMed]
  • Nordstrand K, Melhus O, Eide TJ, Larsen T, Giercksky KE. Intraabdominal granuloma reaction in rats after introduction of maize-starch powder. Acta Pathol Microbiol Immunol Scand A. 1987 Mar;95(2):93–98. [PubMed]
  • Davies JD, Neely J. The histopathology of peritoneal starch granulomas. J Pathol. 1972 Aug;107(4):265–278. [PubMed]
  • POSTLETHWAIT RW, HOWARD HL, SCHANHER PW. Comparison of tissue reaction to talc and modified starch glove powder. Surgery. 1949 Jan;25(1):22–29. [PubMed]
  • POSTLETHWAIT RW, McRAE JT, et al. Absorbable starch glove powder. Am J Surg. 1949 Oct;78(4):510–513. [PubMed]
  • Cooke SA, Hamilton DG. The significance of starch powder contamination in the aetiology of peritoneal adhesions. Br J Surg. 1977 Jun;64(6):410–412. [PubMed]
  • Cox KR. Starch granuloma (pseudo-malignant seedlings). Br J Surg. 1970 Sep;57(9):650–653. [PubMed]
  • MCNAUGHT GH. STARCH GRANULOMA: A PRESENT-DAY SURGICAL HAZARD. Br J Surg. 1964 Nov;51:845–849. [PubMed]
  • Raftery AT. Regeneration of parietal and visceral peritoneum. A light microscopical study. Br J Surg. 1973 Apr;60(4):293–299. [PubMed]
  • ELLIS H. The aetiology of post-operative abdominal adhesions. An experimental study. Br J Surg. 1962 Jul;50:10–16. [PubMed]
  • Fraser I. Simple and effective method of removing starch powder from surgical gloves. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1982 Jun 19;284(6332):1835–1835. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

Articles from Annals of Surgery are provided here courtesy of Lippincott, Williams, and Wilkins

Formats:

Related citations in PubMed

See reviews...See all...

Cited by other articles in PMC

See all...

Links

  • MedGen
    MedGen
    Related information in MedGen
  • PubMed
    PubMed
    PubMed citations for these articles