Lazurenko V. V., Safonov R. A., Tertyshnyk D. Yu., Zhelezniakov O. Yu., Zub O. V., Sharashydze A. H., Blahoveshchenskyi R. Ye.

PREVENTION OF ADHESION FORMATION DURING SURGICAL PROCEDURES IN OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY

---

Show/Download

About the author:

Lazurenko V. V., Safonov R. A., Tertyshnyk D. Yu., Zhelezniakov O. Yu., Zub O. V., Sharashydze A. H., Blahoveshchenskyi R. Ye.

Heading:

CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE

Type of article:

Scientific article

Annotation:

Postoperative adhesion formation (PAF) is a pathological process characterized by fibrous adhesions developing between the surface of an organ and the wall of a cavity or an adjacent organ following trauma or ischemia. These adhesions form dense septa, bands, and “bridges” with their own vascularization and innervation. PAF is associated with a number of complications, including prolonged hospitalization due to the presence of the disease, increased duration and complexity of surgical procedures during repeat operations, significant financial costs related to pa tient examination and treatment, and increased postoperative morbidity and mortality. Therefore, the aim of this study was to optimize preventive measures for postoperative adhesion formation following surgical interventions in obstetric and gynecological practice. The main group consisted of 37 women (15 after cesarean section, 10 after myomectomy, and 12 after ovarian tumor removal) who received the proposed mixture into the abdominal cavity during surgery in order to prevent PAF. The mixture consisted of analgesic, hemostatic, and corticosteroid compo nents. The comparison group included 32 women (12 after cesarean section, 10 after myomectomy, and 10 after ovarian tumor removal) who did not receive the mixture during surgery. Ten women without a history of surgical intervention constituted the control group. It was determined that patients who did not receive intraperitoneal ad ministration of the proposed agents during surgery demonstrated intensified inflammatory responses, manifested by pronounced expression of proinflammatory cytokines IL-1β, IL-6, and TNF-α, as well as changes in the levels of endothelial factors (VEGF, ET-1, eNOS) and C-reactive protein.

Tags:

Bibliography:

1. Alkatout I, De Wilde RL, Herrmann J, Klapdor R, Meinhold-Heerlein I, Mészáros J, et al. Adhesion Prevention in Gynecologic Surgery: Guidance and Clinical Experience. J Clin Med. 2024;13(24):7517. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13247517.
2. Capmas P, Payen F, Lemaire A, Fernandez H. Adhesions in abdomino-pelvic surgeries: A real economic impact? PLoS One. 2022;17(10):e0276810. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0276810.
3. Fatehi Hassanabad A, Zarzycki AN, Jeon K, Dundas JA, Vasanthan V, Deniset JF, et al. Prevention of Post-Operative Adhesions: A Comprehensive Review of Present and Emerging Strategies. Biomolecules. 2021;11(7):1027. DOI: 10.3390/biom11071027.
4. Ardavín C, Alvarez-Ladrón N, Ferriz M, Gutiérrez-González A, Vega-Pérez A. Mouse Tissue-Resident Peritoneal Macrophages in Homeostasis, Repair, Infection, and Tumor Metastasis. Adv Sci (Weinh). 2023;10(11):e2206617. DOI: 10.1002/advs.202206617.
5. Were F, Desai H. Adhesiolysis. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/ NBK563219/.
6. Tang J, Xiang Z, Bernards MT, Chen S. Peritoneal adhesions: Occurrence, prevention and experimental models. Acta Biomater. 2020;116:84-104. DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2020.08.036.
7. Hu Q, Xia X, Kang X, Song P, Liu Z, Wang M, et al. A review of physiological and cellular mechanisms underlying fibrotic postoperative adhesion. Int J Biol Sci. 2021;17(1):298-306. DOI: 10.7150/ijbs.54403.
8. Chen J, Tang X, Wang Z, Perez A, Yao B, Huang K, et al. Techniques for navigating postsurgical adhesions: Insights into mechanisms and future directions. Bioeng Transl Med. 2023;8(6):e10565. DOI: 10.1002/btm2. 10565.
9. Wang R, Guo T, Li J. Mechanisms of Peritoneal Mesothelial Cells in Peritoneal Adhesion. Biomolecules. 2022;12(10):1498. DOI: 10.3390/ biom 12101498.
10. Liu ZY, Li RF, Qin HY, Ma PF. Postoperative adhesion formation: the role of peritoneal macrophages and targeting therapy. Front Immunol. 2025;16:1601642. DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2025.1601642.
11. Vega-Pérez A, Villarrubia LH, Godio C, Gutiérrez-González A, Feo-Lucas L, Ferriz M, et al. Resident macrophage-dependent immune cell scaffolds drive anti-bacterial defense in the peritoneal cavity. Immunity. 2021;54(11):2578-94.e5. DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2021.10.007.
12. Yang S, Zheng Y, Pu Z, Nian H, Li J. The multiple roles of macrophages in peritoneal adhesion. Immunol Cell Biol. 2025;103(1):31-44. DOI: 10.1111/imcb.12831.
13. Mehta NY, Marietta M, Copelin II EL. Intraabominal Abscesses. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025. Available from: https:// www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK519573/.
14. Baz AA, Hao H, Lan S, Li Z, Liu S, Chen S, et al. Neutrophil extracellular traps in bacterial infections and evasion strategies. Front Immunol. 2024;15:1357967. DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1357967.
15. Lu Y, Elrod J, Herrmann M, Knopf J, Boettcher M. Neutrophil Extracellular Traps: A Crucial Factor in Post-Surgical Abdominal Adhesion Formation. Cells. 2024;13(11):991. DOI: 10.3390/cells13110991.
16. Taha M, Shafique U, Rashid W, Taha H, Awan M, Ayyub A, et al. Diagnostic Accuracy of C-reactive Protein, Procalcitonin, White Blood Cell Count, and Neutrophil-Lymphocyte Ratio in the Early Detection of Post-surgical Infections: A Systematic Review. Cureus. 2025;17(4):e81853. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.81853.
17. Shetty M. Acute Pelvic Pain: Role of Imaging in the Diagnosis and Management. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2023;44(6):491-500. DOI: 10.1053/j.sult.2023.10.004.
18. Oliveira Souza Lima SR, Kanemitsu K, Rashid M, Patel VK, Ali M. Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Adhesion Prevention Agents in Abdominal and Pelvic Surgeries: A Systematic Review. Cureus. 2024;16(10):e71280. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.71280.
19. Wang PY, Lee YC, Liu WM, Chen CH. Surgical outcome of benign cases with pelvic adhesions undergoing robotic total hysterectomy. J Chin Med Assoc. 2022;85(8):853-8. DOI: 10.1097/JCMA.0000000000000760.
20. James P, Kaushal D, Beaumont Wilson R. NETosis in Surgery: Pathophysiology, Prevention, and Treatment. Ann Surg. 2024;279(5):765 80. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006196.
21. Ye R, Zhu Z, Gu T, Cao D, Jiang K, Dai Q, et al. Neutrophil extracellular traps-inspired DNA hydrogel for wound hemostatic adjuvant. Nat Commun. 2024;15(1):5557. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-49933-3.
22. Lu Y, Elrod J, Herrmann M, Knopf J, Boettcher M. Neutrophil Extracellular Traps: A Crucial Factor in Post-Surgical Abdominal Adhesion Formation. Cells. 2024;13(11):991. DOI: 10.3390/cells13110991.
23. Powers BK, Ponder HL, Findley R, Wolfe R, Patel GP, Parrish RH 2nd, et al. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) Society abdominal and thoracic surgery recommendations: A systematic review and comparison of guidelines for perioperative and pharmacotherapy core items. World J Surg. 2024;48(3):509-23. DOI: 10.1002/wjs.12101.
24. Elias KM. The Evolution of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) in Gynecology: An Introduction. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2025;68(4):473 8. DOI: 10.1097/GRF.0000000000000964.
25. Ahmad G, Kim K, Thompson M, Agarwal P, O’Flynn H, Hindocha A, et al. Barrier agents for adhesion prevention after gynaecological surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;3(3):CD000475. DOI: 10.1002/ 14651858.CD000475.pub4.
26. Fazel Anvari-Yazdi A, MacPhee DJ, Badea I, Chen X. Gynecologic postoperative anti-adhesion barriers: From biomaterials to barrier de velopment. Biomater Biosyst. 2025;19:100115. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbiosy. 2025.100115.
27. Ahmed TM, Coco A, Vaught AJ, Gomez EN. MR imaging for preoperative characterization of pelvic adhesions: role in diagnosis and sur gical planning. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2025;50(2):966-78. DOI: 10.1007/s00261-024-04527-x.
28. Flutur IM, Păduraru DN, Bolocan A, Palcău AC, Ion D, Andronic O. Postsurgical Adhesions: Is There Any Prophylactic Strategy Really Working? J Clin Med. 2023;12(12):3931. DOI: 10.3390/jcm12123931.
29. Sukhanova AA, Ratushnyak NYA, Sorokina OO. Patohenetychni pidkhody do profilaktyky perytonealnykh tazovykh spayok. Zdorovya zhinky. 2018;10(136):22-5. [in Ukrainian].
30. Romanenko T, Shahanov P. Profilaktyka rozvytku perytonealnykh tazovykh spayok u zhinok reproduktyvnoho viku. Reproduktyvne zdor ovya zhinky. 2021;5:48-55. DOI: 10.30841/2708-8731.5.2021.240026. [in Ukrainian].
31. Fofanov OD, Didukh IM. Likuvannya ta profilaktyka spayovoyi kyshkovoyi neprokhidnosti u ditey. Pediatric Surgery (Ukraine). 2023;4(81):43 8. DOI: 10.15574/PS.2023.81.43. [in Ukrainian].
32. Telemukha S, Pyptyuk O, Didukh I. Zastosuvannya protyspaykovykh preparativ u vahitnykh zhinok pry zashchemlennyakh pislyaoperatsi ynykh hryzhakh pry hostriy spaykoviy tonkokyshkoviy neprokhidnosti. Neonatolohiya, khirurhiya ta perynatalna medytsyna. 2025;1(55):69 74. DOI: 10.24061/2413-4260.XY.1.55.2025.11. [in Ukrainian].
33. Safonov RA, Lazurenko VV. Distreptaza Distrept yak komponent multimodalnoho likuvannya pislyaoperatsiynykh hinekolohichnykh usk ladnen. Ukrayinskyy medychnyy chasopys. 2025;8(174):35-40. DOI: 10.32471/umj.1680-3051.272646. [in Ukrainian].

Publication of the article:

«Bulletin of problems biology and medicine», 2026 Issue 1, 180, 270-279 pages, index UDC 618-089.888-06-007.274-084

DOI:

10.29254/2077-4214-2026-1-180-270-279