Evaluation of repair in duodenal perforation with human amniotic membrane: An animal model (dog)

There is a growing tendency toward application of human amniotic membrane (HAM) as a biologic substitute in various tissue injuries where a significant tissue loss is a matter of concern. In gastrointestinal injuries especially duodenal ones, some potential limitations in current surgical techniques...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Advanced biomedical research 2014, Vol.3 (1), p.113-113
Main Authors: Ghahramani, Leila, Jahromi, Ali Bagherpour, Dehghani, Mohammad Reza, Ashraf, Mohammad Javad, Rahimikazerooni, Salar, Rezaianzadeh, Abbas, Safarpour, Ali Reza, Hosseini, Seyed Vahid
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Amnion
Amniotic membrane
Care and treatment
duodenum
experimental study
Health aspects
Intestinal perforation
Original
wound healing
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:There is a growing tendency toward application of human amniotic membrane (HAM) as a biologic substitute in various tissue injuries where a significant tissue loss is a matter of concern. In gastrointestinal injuries especially duodenal ones, some potential limitations in current surgical techniques contribute to not fully acceptable healing outcomes. Thus, this study was carried out to assess repair with HAM patch for duodenal defect in comparison with simple duodenoraphy in an animal model (dog). A total of 15 male German shepherd dogs weighing 23-27 kg were randomly divided into two groups. Group A with 10 dogs, which were a candidate for duodenal repair by amniotic membrane patch and Group B consisted of 5 dogs perform simple duodenorraphy. A precise control was made to match all conditions except surgical technique. Macroscopic and microscopic features of the healed duodenal lumen in both groups were recorded. Gross evaluation revealed no difference in luminal diameter in both groups. Statistical analysis of duodenal diameter between both groups after operation also showed no significant difference (P v = 0.789). Histological assessment indicated less inflammation with better wound healing in Group A. It seems that repairing duodenal wall defect with HAM would result in better histological outcomes compared with what is seen in simple duodenoraphy in animal models. However, there is no significant difference regarding surgical findings.
ISSN:2277-9175
2277-9175
DOI:10.4103/2277-9175.131029