World Journal of Surgery

, Volume 31, Issue 11, pp 2125–2131 | Cite as

Efficacy and Safety of Seprafilm for Preventing Postoperative Abdominal Adhesion: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

  • Qiqiang Zeng
  • Zhengping Yu
  • Jie You
  • Qiyu Zhang
Article

Abstract

Background

There is no clear consensus on the efficacy and safety of hyaluronate-carboxymethylcellulose membrane (Seprafilm) for preventing postoperative abdominal adhesion. This study is a meta-analysis of the available evidence.

Methods

A search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library identified eight studies that met the inclusion criteria for data extraction. Estimates of effectiveness were performed using fixed- and random-effects models. The effect was calculated as an odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the statistical software Review Manager Version 4.2. Level of significance was set at p < 0.05.

Results

Outcomes of 4203 patients were studied. The incidence of grade 0 adhesions among Seprafilm-treated patients was statistically significantly more than that observed among control group patients (OR 95%CI, 3.74–20.34; p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in the incidence of grade 1 adhesions between Seprafilm and control groups (OR 95%CI, 0.58–2.71; p = 0.56). The severity of grade 2 and grade 3 adhesions among Seprafilm-treated patients was significantly less than that observed among control group patients (OR 95%CI, 0.22–0.93; p = 0.03; OR 95%CI, 0.09–0.63; p < 0.01, respectively). The incidence of intestinal obstruction after abdominal surgery was not different between Seprafilm and control groups (OR 95%CI, 0.78–1.23; p = 0.84). Using Seprafilm significantly increased the incidence of abdominal abscesses (OR 95%CI, 1.06–2.54; p = 0.03) and anastomotic leaks (OR 95%CI, 1.18–3.50; p = 0.01).

Conclusions

Our systematic review and meta-analysis showed that Seprafilm could decrease abdominal adhesions after general surgery, which may benefit patients, but could not reduce postoperative intestinal obstruction. At the same time, Seprafilm did increase abdominal abscesses and anastomotic leaks.

References

  1. 1.
    Menzies D (1992) Peritoneal adhesions: incidence, cause, and prevention. Surg Annu 24(Pt 1):27–45PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Liakakos T, Thomakos N, Fine PM, et al. (2001) Peritoneal adhesions: etiology, pathophysiology, and clinical significance: recent advances in prevention and management. Dig Surg 18:260–273PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Inoue M, Uchida K, Miki C, et al. (2005) Efficacy of Seprafilm for reducing reoperative risk in pediatric surgical patients undergoing abdominal surgery. J Pediatr Surg 40:1301–1306PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ray NF, Denton WG, Thamer M, et al. (1998) Abdominal adhesiolysis: inpatient care and expenditures in the United States in 1994. J Am Coll Surg 186:1–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ellis H (2005) Intraabdominal and postoperative peritoneal adhesions. J Am Coll Surg 200:641–644PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Burgess L, Greenwalt K, Rowe E, et al. (1999) Evaluation of a plasticized sodium hyaluronate/carboxymethylcellulose adhesion barrier. In: Society for Biomaterials, 25th Annual Meeting Transactions, p 169Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eroglu A, Demirci S, Kurtman C, et al. (2001) Prevention of intra-abdominal adhesions by using Seprafilm in rats undergoing bowel resection and radiation therapy. Colorectal Dis 3:33–37PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Oncel M, Remzi FH, Senagore AJ, et al. (2004) Application of Adcon-P or Seprafilm in consecutive laparotomies using a murine model. Am J Surg 187:304–308PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sikkink CJ, Postma VA, Reijnen MM, et al. (2004) Hyaluronan-based antiadhesive membrane has no major effect on intraperitoneal growth of colonic tumour cells. Eur Surg Res 36:123–128PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tarhan OR, Eroglu A, Cetin R, et al. (2005) Effects of Seprafilm on peritoneal fibrinolytic system. ANZ J Surg 75:690–692PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Uchida K, Urata H, Mohri Y, et al. (2005) Seprafilm does not aggravate intraperitoneal septic conditions or evoke systemic inflammatory response. Surg Today 35:1054–1059PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Osada H, Minai M, Tsunoda I, et al. (1999) The effect of hyaluronic acid-carboxymethylcellulose in reducing adhesion reformation in rabbits. J Int Med Res 27:292–296PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    van Oosterom FJ, van Lanschot JJ, Oosting J, et al. (2000) Hyaluronic acid/carboxymethylcellulose membrane surrounding an intraperitoneal or subcutaneous jejunojejunostomy in rats. Eur J Surg 166:654–658PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bulbuller N, Sapmaz E, Akpolat N, et al. (2003) Effect of a bioresorbable membrane on postoperative adhesions and wound healing. J Reprod Med 48:547–550PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Burns JW, Colt MJ, Burgess LS, et al. (1997) Preclinical evaluation of Seprafilm bioresorbable menbrane. Eur J Surg 577(Suppl):40–48Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Becker JM, Dayton MT, Fazio VW, et al. (1996) Prevention of postoperative abdominal adhesions by a sodium hyaluronate-based bioresorbable membrane: a prospective, randomized, double-blind multicenter study. J Am Coll Surg 183:297–306PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Diamond MP (1996) Reduction of adhesions after uterine myomectomy by Seprafilm membrane (HAL-F): a blinded, prospective, randomized, multicenter clinical study: Seprafilm Adhesion Study Group. Fertil Steril 66:904–910PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Beck DE (1997) The role of Seprafilm bioresorbable membrane in adhesion prevention. Eur J Surg Suppl 577:49–55PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vrijland WW, Tseng LN, Eijkman HJ, et al. (2002) Fewer intraperitoneal adhesions with use of hyaluronic acid-carboxymethylcellulose membrane: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Surg 235:193–199PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Beck DE, Cohen Z, Fleshman JW, et al. (2003) A prospective, randomized, multicenter, controlled study of the safety of Seprafilm adhesion barrier in abdominopelvic surgery of the intestine. Dis Colon Rectum 46:1310–1319PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cohen Z, Senagore AJ, Dayton MT, et al. (2005) Prevention of postoperative abdominal adhesions by a novel, glycerol/sodium hyaluronate/carboxymethylcellulose-based bioresorbable membrane: a prospective, randomized, evaluator-blinded multicenter study. Dis Colon Rectum 48:1130–1139PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kusunoki M, Ikeuchi H, Yanagi H, et al. (2005) Bioresorbable hyaluronate-carboxymethylcellulose membrane (Seprafilm) in surgery for rectal carcinoma: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Surg Today 35:940–945PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fazio VW, Cohen Z, Fleshman JW, et al. (2006) Reduction in adhesive small-bowel obstruction by Seprafilm adhesion barrier after intestinal resection. Dis Colon Rectum 49:1–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Salum M, Wexner SD, Nogueras JJ, et al. (2006) Does sodium hyaluronate- and carboxymethylcellulose-based bioresorbable membrane (Seprafilm) decrease operative time for loop ileostomy closure? Tech Coloproctol 10:187–190PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. (1996) Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 17:1–12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, et al. (1999) Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement: quality of reporting of meta-analyses. Lancet 354:1896–1900PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    DeCherney AH, diZerega GS (1997) Clinical problem of intraperitoneal postsurgical adhesion formation following general surgery and the use of adhesion prevention barriers. Surg Clin North Am 77:671–688PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sasaki T, Shimura H, Tanaka T, et al. (2004) Protection of trocar sites from gallbladder cancer implantation by sodium hyaluronate carboxymethylcellulose-based bioresorbable membrane (Seprafilm) in a murine model [corrected]. Surg Endosc 18:246–251PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tsapanos VS, Stathopoulou LP, Papathanassopoulou VS, et al. (2002) The role of Seprafilm bioresorbable membrane in the prevention and therapy of endometrial synechiae. J Biomed Mater Res 63:10–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tang CL, Seow-Choen F, Fook-Chong S, et al. (2003) Bioresorbable adhesion barrier facilitates early closure of the defunctioning ileostomy after rectal excision: a prospective, randomized trial. Dis Colon Rectum 46:1200–1207PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Qiqiang Zeng
    • 1
  • Zhengping Yu
    • 1
  • Jie You
    • 2
  • Qiyu Zhang
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of General Surgery the First Affiliated Hospital, Wenzhou Medical CollegeWenzhouChina
  2. 2.Department of Oncological Surgerythe First Affiliated Hospital, Wenzhou Medical CollegeWenzhouChina

Personalised recommendations