Comparison of the healing status in suture-less end-to-end intestinal anastomosis using TachoSil with classic two-layer anastomosis in rats

  • Hadi Hadavi
  • Bahram Pourseidi
  • Shahriar Dabiri
  • Mohammadreza Ghasemian Moghaddam
  • Alireza Amirbeigi
  • Khatereh Dehghani
  • Amir Hossein PourdavoodEmail author
  • Iman Shamohammadi
  • Maryam Dehghankhalili
  • Akram Arabi
Original Article


The classical two-layer anastomosis has been experimentally compared with anastomosis using synthetic TachoSil in terms of pre- and post-surgical symptoms and healing status of the anastomotic area in rats. Thirty-six adult male rats were randomly allocated into two groups: in group C (control), classic anastomosis was performed in the ileum of the small intestine, 10 cm away from the ileocecal valve using Vicryl 5-0 interrupted suture; group S (study) received anastomosis in the same area but with TachoSil using three sutures (mesenteric, anti-mesenteric, and anterior wall as suture-less method). The obtained results were analyzed by SPSS20 software, using Chi-square test. Based on the obtained results, group C had more favorable anastomotic healing than group S. Actually, the fibroblast and collagen were seen in most cases of the control rats, while healing was stopped in group S (TachoSil group) in early stages due to thrombosis and vasculitis gangrene. According to the findings, TachoSil patch cannot be advised for safe use in suturing the less small-bowel anastomosis.


Anastomosis Experimental trial TachoSil Rat Peristalsis Anastomotic leakage Dilation 



Research council of Kerman University of Medical sciences is greatly appreciated for supporting this project. The authors would like to thank Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran and also Center for Development of Clinical Research of Nemazee Hospital and Dr. Nasrin Shokrpour for editorial assistance.

Compliance with ethical standards

Ethical approval

All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Anegg U, Rychlik R, Smolle-Jüttner F (2008) Do the benefits of shorter hospital stay associated with the use of fleece-bound sealing outweigh the cost of the materials? Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 7(2):292–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Babor R, Talbot M, Tyndal A (2009) Treatment of upper gastrointestinal leaks with a removable, covered, self-expanding metallic stent. Surgical Laparoscopy Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques 19(1):e1–e4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bhanot S, Alex JC (2002) Current applications of platelet gels in facial plastic surgery. Facial plastic surgery 18(01):027–034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bonanomi G, Prince J, McSteen F, Schauer P, Hamad G (2004) Sealing effect of fibrin glue on the healing of gastrointestinal anastomoses. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 18(11):1620–1624Google Scholar
  5. Buchanan GN, Bartram CI, Phillips RK, Gould SW, Halligan S, Rockall TA et al (2003) Efficacy of fibrin sealant in the management of complex anal fistula. Dis Colon Rectum 46(9):1167–1174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cintron JR, Park JJ, Orsay CP, Pearl RK, Nelson RL, Sone JH et al (2000) Repair of fistulas-in-ano using fibrin adhesive. Dis Colon Rectum 43(7):944–949CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cueto J, Barrientos T, Rodríguez E, Del Moral P (2011) A new biodegradable adhesive for protection of intestinal anastomoses. Preliminary communication. Arch Med Res 42(6):475–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Erb MA, Claus T, Hartrumpf M, Bachmann S, Albes JM (2009) The use of Tachosil® surgical patch or fibrin glue in coronary artery surgery does not affect quality of anastomosis or provoke postoperative adhesions in pigs. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 36(4):703–707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Horowitz B, Busch M (2008) Estimating the pathogen safety of manufactured human plasma products: application to fibrin sealants and to thrombin. Transfusion. 48(8):1739–1753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jackson MR (2001) Fibrin sealants in surgical practice: an overview. Am J Surg 182(2):S1–S7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Karagöz Avcı S, Yüceyar S, Aytac E, Bayraktar O, Erenler I, Ustun H, et al. (2011) Comparison of classical surgery and sutureless repair with DuraSeal or fibrin glue for duodenal perforation in ratsGoogle Scholar
  12. Kaya C, Demir U, Coşkun H, Kalyoncu A, Gündüz B, Eroğlu T et al (2004) Comparison of repair techniques in rat duodonal perforations: simple closure, simple closure and omentoplasty, and fibrin tissue adhesive. Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi= Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery: TJTES 10(1):11–16Google Scholar
  13. Lau W-Y, Leung K-L, Kwong K-H, Davey IC, Robertson C, Dawson J et al (1996) A randomized study comparing laparoscopic versus open repair of perforated peptic ulcer using suture or sutureless technique. Ann Surg 224(2):131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Nordentoft T, Rømer J, Sørensen M (2007) Sealing of gastrointestinal anastomoses with a fibrin glue-coated collagen patch: a safety study. J Investig Surg 20(6):363–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Papavramidis ST, Eleftheriadis EE, Papavramidis TS, Kotzampassi KE, Gamvros OG (2004) Endoscopic management of gastrocutaneous fistula after bariatric surgery by using a fibrin sealant. Gastrointest Endosc 59(2):296–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Papavramidis TS, Kotzampassi K, Kotidis E, Eleftheriadis EE, Papavramidis ST (2008) Endoscopic fibrin sealing of gastrocutaneous fistulas after sleeve gastrectomy and biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 23(12):1802–1805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Silecchia G, Boru CE, Mouiel J, Rossi M, Anselmino M, Morino M et al (2008) The use of fibrin sealant to prevent major complications following laparoscopic gastric bypass: results of a multicenter, randomized trial. Surg Endosc 22(11):2492–2497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Stumpf M, Junge K, Rosch R, Krones C, Klinge U, Schumpelick V (2009) Suture-free small bowel anastomoses using collagen fleece covered with fibrin glue in pigs. J Investig Surg 22(2):138–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Zekavat O, Amanat A, Karami M, Paydar S, Gramizadeh B, Zareian-Jahromi M (2016) Wound healing studies using Punica granatum Peel: an animal experimental study. Adv Skin Wound Care 29(5):217–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Zmora O, Mizrahi N, Rotholtz N, Pikarsky AJ, Weiss EG, Nogueras JJ et al (2003) Fibrin glue sealing in the treatment of perineal fistulas. Dis Colon Rectum 46(5):584–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hadi Hadavi
    • 1
  • Bahram Pourseidi
    • 1
  • Shahriar Dabiri
    • 2
  • Mohammadreza Ghasemian Moghaddam
    • 3
  • Alireza Amirbeigi
    • 1
  • Khatereh Dehghani
    • 4
  • Amir Hossein Pourdavood
    • 1
    Email author
  • Iman Shamohammadi
    • 5
  • Maryam Dehghankhalili
    • 6
  • Akram Arabi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryKerman University of Medical ScienceKermanIran
  2. 2.Department of PathologyKerman University of Medical ScienceKermanIran
  3. 3.School of MedicineBirjand University of Medical ScienceBirjandIran
  4. 4.Department of CardiologyJahrom University of Medical ScienceJahromIran
  5. 5.Department of UrologyShiraz University of Medical ScienceShirazIran
  6. 6.Department of SurgeryShiraz University of Medical ScienceShirazIran

Personalised recommendations