The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The inpatient burden of abdominal and gynecological adhesiolysis in the US
Open accessAbstract
Background: Adhesions are fibrous bands of scar tissue, often a result of surgery, that form between internal organs and tissues, joining them together abnormally. Postoperative adhesions frequently occur following abdominal surgery, and are associated with a large economic burden. This study examines the inpatient burden of adhesiolysis in the United States (i.e., number and rate of events, cost, length of stay [LOS]). Methods: Hospital discharge data for patients with primary and secondary adhesiolysis were analyzed using the 2005 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Procedures were aggregated by body system. Results: We identified 351,777 adhesiolysis-related hospitalizations: 23.2% for primary and 76.8% for secondary adhesiolysis. The average LOS was 7.8 days for primary adhesiolysis. We found that 967,332 days of care were attributed to adhesiolysis-related procedures, with inpatient expenditures totaling $2.3 billion ($1.4 billion for primary adhesiolysis; $926 million for secondary adhesiolysis). Hospitalizations for adhesiolysis increased steadily by age and were higher for women. Of secondary adhesiolysis procedures, 46.3% involved the female reproductive tract, resulting in 57,005 additional days of care and $220 million in attributable costs. Conclusions: Adhesiolysis remain an important surgical problem in the United States. Hospitalization for this condition leads to high direct surgical costs, which should be of interest to providers and payers.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Maung, A. A., Johnson, D. C., Piper, G. L., Barbosa, R. R., Rowell, S. E., Bokhari, F., Collins, J. N., Gordon, J. R., Ra, J. H., & Kerwin, A. J. (2012) · Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery · doi:10.1097/ta.0b013e31827019de · Cited by 288
Prevention of Post-Operative Adhesions: A Comprehensive Review of Present and Emerging Strategies
Fatehi Hassanabad, A., Zarzycki, A. N., Jeon, K., Dundas, J. A., Vasanthan, V., Deniset, J. F., & Fedak, P. W. M. (2021) · Biomolecules · doi:10.3390/biom11071027 · Cited by 178
Role of the peritoneal cavity in the prevention of postoperative adhesions, pain, and fatigue
Koninckx, P. R., Gomel, V., Ussia, A., & Adamyan, L. (2016) · Fertility and Sterility · doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.08.012 · Cited by 139
Liao, J., Li, X., & Fan, Y. (2023) · Bioactive Materials · doi:10.1016/j.bioactmat.2023.02.026 · Cited by 124
Sprayable anti-adhesive hydrogel for peritoneal macrophage scavenging in post-surgical applications
Song, W., Lee, C., Jeong, H., Kim, S., & Hwang, N. S. (2024) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-024-52753-0 · Cited by 37
Metadata
- Authors
- Sikirica, V., Bapat, B., Candrilli, S. D., Davis, K. L., Wilson, M., & Johns, A.
- Venue
- BMC Surgery
- Published
- 2011-06-09
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 13-13
- ISSN
- 1471-2482 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1978431278
- Cited by
- 184
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The inpatient burden of abdominal and gynecological adhesiolysis in the US. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1471-2482-11-13
- The paper
- Sikirica, V., Bapat, B., Candrilli, S. D., Davis, K. L., Wilson, M., & Johns, A. (2011). The inpatient burden of abdominal and gynecological adhesiolysis in the US. BMC Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2482-11-13
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.