CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 44Intestinal and Peritoneal AdhesionsSurgical Sutures and AdhesivesHernia repair and management

A new bioabsorbable polymer film to prevent peritoneal adhesions validated in a post-surgical animal model

Open access
Allègre, Lucie, Le Teuff, Isabelle, Leprince, Salomé, Warembourg, Sophie, Taillades, Hubert, Garric, Xavier, Letouzey, Vincent, Huberlant, Stephanie·2018·PLOS ONE
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0202285PMC PMC6218020
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal adhesions are a serious surgical postoperative complication. The aim of this study is to investigate, in a rat model, the anti-adhesive effects of a bioabsorbable film of polymer combining polyethylene glycol and polylactic acid. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-three animals were randomized into five groups according to the anti-adhesion treatment: Hyalobarrier®, Seprafilm®, Polymer A (PA), Polymer B (PB), and control. The rats were euthanized on days 5 and 12 to evaluate the extent, severity and degree of adhesions and histopathological changes. Three animals were euthanized at day 2 in PA, PB and control groups to observe the in vivo elimination. RESULTS: Macroscopic adhesion formation was significantly lower in the PA group than in the control group at day 5 (median adhesion score 0±0 vs 9.6 ±0.5 p = 0.002) and at day 12 (0±0 vs 7.3±4 p = 0.02). Furthermore, median adhesion score at day 5 was significantly lower in the PA group than in the Seprafilm group (0±0 vs 4.2± 3.9 p = 0.03). Residence time of PA seems longer than PB. CONCLUSION: The PA bioabsorbable film seems efficient in preventing the formation of peritoneal adhesions.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0202285

Cites

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • PEG-based films maintain structural integrity without causing additional mechanical irritation, making them suitable for minimally invasive adhesion prevention.

    “Unlike rigid or brittle polymers, PEG-based films maintain structural integrity without causing additional mechanical irritation, making them highly suitable for minimally invasive adhesion prevention strategies [217].”

    From Biomaterials in Postoperative Adhesion Barriers and Uterine Tissue Engineering (2025) · cites this paper as [217]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) describes the PLA-PEG-PLA film as malleable, easy to reposition, and seemingly better suited than Seprafilm for laparoscopy. It does not establish that the films maintain structural integrity or cause no mechanical irritation; its histological finding of no specific inflammatory response is not a test of mechanical irritation. Suitability for minimally invasive use is presented as a prospect, not demonstrated in the animal study. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 49

  1. [1]diZerega GS. Contemporary adhesion prevention. Fertil Steril. Févr 1994; 61(2): 219– 35. 8299773
  2. [2]ten Broek RPG, Issa Y, van Santbrink EJP, Bouvy ND, Kruitwagen RFPM, Jeekel J, et al Burden of adhesions in abdominal and pelvic surgery: systematic review and met-analysis. BMJ. 2013; 347: f5588 10.1136/bmj.f5588 24092941 PMC3789584 · DOI
  3. [3]Fredriksson F, Christofferson RH, Lilja HE. Adhesive small bowel obstruction after laparotomy during infancy. Br J Surg. Févr 2016; 103(3): 284– 9. 10.1002/bjs.10072 26667204 · DOI
  4. [4]Lower AM, Hawthorn RJ, Ellis H, O’Brien F, Buchan S, Crowe AM. The impact of adhesions on hospital readmissions over ten years after 8849 open gynaecological operations: an assessment from the Surgical and Clinical Adhesions Research Study. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol. Juill 2000; 107(7): 855– 62. 10901556
  5. [5]Ellis H, Moran BJ, Thompson JN, Parker MC, Wilson MS, Menzies D, et al Adhesion-related hospital readmissions after abdominal and pelvic surgery: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Lond Engl. 1 Mai 1999; 353(9163): 1476– 80. 10232313
  6. [6]Cheong YC, Laird SM, Li TC, Shelton JB, Ledger WL, Cooke ID. Peritoneal healing and adhesion formation/reformation. Hum Reprod Update. Déc 2001; 7(6): 556– 66. 11727864
  7. [7]Ozel H, Avsar FM, Topaloglu S, Sahin M. Induction and assessment methods used in experimental adhesion studies. Wound Repair Regen Off Publ Wound Heal Soc Eur Tissue Repair Soc. Août 2005; 13(4): 358– 64. 16008724
  8. [8]Duron J-J. Postoperative intraperitoneal adhesion pathophysiology. Colorectal Dis Off J Assoc Coloproctology G B Irel. 10 2007; 9 Suppl 2: 14– 24. 17824966
  9. [9]Fortin CN, Saed GM, Diamond MP. Predisposing factors to post-operative adhesion development. Hum Reprod Update. Août 2015; 21(4): 536– 51. 10.1093/humupd/dmv021 25935859 · DOI
  10. [10]ten Broek RPG, van Goor H. Adhesion barriers for abdominal surgery and oncology—Authors’ reply. Lancet Lond Engl. 16 Août 2014; 384(9943): 581. 25131974
  11. [11]Hindocha A, Beere L, Dias S, Watson A, Ahmad G. Adhesion prevention agents for gynaecological surgery: an overview of Cochrane reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015; 1: CD011254 10.1002/14651858.CD011254.pub2 25561409 PMC6544806 · DOI
  12. [12]Ahmad G, Mackie FL, Iles DA, O’Flynn H, Dias S, Metwally M, et al Fluid and pharmacological agents for adhesion prevention after gynaecological surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014; 7: CD001298. 25005450
  13. [13]Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine in collaboration with Society of Reproductive Surgeons. Pathogenesis, consequences, and control of peritoneal adhesions in gynecologic surgery: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. Mai 2013; 99(6): 1550– 5. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.02.031 23472951 · DOI
  14. [14]ten Broek RPG, Stommel MWJ, Strik C, van Laarhoven CJHM, Keus F, van Goor H. Benefits and harms of adhesion barriers for abdominal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Lond Engl. 4 Janv 2014; 383(9911): 48– 59. 24075279
  15. [15]Hong M-K, Ding D-C. Seprafilm® Application Method in Laparoscopic Surgery. JSLS [Internet]. 2017 [cité 19 juill 2018]; 21(1). Disponible sur: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5370214/ PMC5370214 28400696
  16. [16]Kusuki I, Suganuma I, Ito F, Akiyama M, Sasaki A, Yamanaka K, et al Usefulness of moistening seprafilm before use in laparoscopic surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. Févr 2014; 24(1): e13– 15. 10.1097/SLE.0b013e31828f6ec1 24487168 · DOI
  17. [17]Farag S, Padilla PF, Smith KA, Sprague ML, Zimberg SE. Management, Prevention, and Sequelae of Adhesions in Women Undergoing Laparoscopic Gynecologic Surgery: a Systematic Review. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 28 Déc 2017; 29289627
  18. [18]Verma SK, Jha E, Kiran K., Bhat S, Suar M, Mohanty PS. Synthesis and characterization of novel polymer-hybrid silver nanoparticles and its biomedical study. Mater Today Proc. 2016; 3(6): 1949– 57.
  19. [19]Rodgers K, Cohn D, Hotovely A, Pines E, Diamond MP, diZerega G. Evaluation of polyethylene glycol/polylactic acid films in the prevention of adhesions in the rabbit adhesion formation and reformation sidewall models. Fertil Steril. Mars 1998; 69(3): 403– 8. 9531866
  20. [20]Mettler L, Audebert A, Lehmann-Willenbrock E, Schive-Peterhansl K, Jacobs VR. A randomized, prospective, controlled, multicenter clinical trial of a sprayable, site-specific adhesion barrier system in patients undergoing myomectomy. Fertil Steril. Août 2004; 82(2): 398– 404. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2003.12.046 15302290 · DOI
  21. [21]Ferland R, Mulani D, Campbell PK. Evaluation of a sprayable polyethylene glycol adhesion barrier in a porcine efficacy model. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl. Déc 2001; 16(12): 2718– 23. 11726601
  22. [22]Parrish LC, Miyamoto T, Fong N, Mattson JS, Cerutis DR. Non-bioabsorbable vs. bioabsorbable membrane: assessment of their clinical efficacy in guided tissue regeneration technique. A systematic review. J Oral Sci. 9 2009; 51(3): 383– 400. 19776505
  23. [23]Ntagiopoulos PG, Demey G, Tavernier T, Dejour D. Comparison of resorption and remodeling of bioabsorbable interference screws in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Int Orthop. Avr 2015; 39(4): 697– 706. 10.1007/s00264-014-2530-8 25231574 · DOI
  24. [24]Vieille P, Huberlant S, Bastide S, Bayon Y, de Tayrac R. Evaluation of in vivo properties of Velosorb™ fast versus Vicryl™ rapide in a functional rabbit model of intradermic suture and episiotomy. J Investig Surg Off J Acad Surg Res. Avr 2015; 28(2): 109– 14. 25437773
  25. [25]Zhang Z, Ni J, Chen L, Yu L, Xu J, Ding J. Biodegradable and thermoreversible PCLA-PEG-PCLA hydrogel as a barrier for prevention of post-operative adhesion. Biomaterials. Juill 2011; 32(21): 4725– 36. 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.03.046 21482434 · DOI
  26. [26]Pouly J-L, Darai E, Yazbeck C, Benifla J-L, Dechaud H, Wattiez A, et al [ Postoperative abdominal adhesions and their prevention in gynaecological surgery: II. How can they be prevented?]. Gynécologie Obstétrique Fertil. Août 2012; 40(7–8): 419– 28. 22137338
  27. [27]Li J, Zhu J, He T, Li W, Zhao Y, Chen Z, et al Prevention of intra-abdominal adhesion using electrospun PEG/PLGA nanofibrous membranes. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 1 9 2017; 78: 988– 97. 10.1016/j.msec.2017.04.017 28576076 · DOI
  28. [28]Yu L, Zhang Z, Ding J. Influence of LA and GA sequence in the PLGA block on the properties of thermogelling PLGA-PEG-PLGA block copolymers. Biomacromolecules. 11 Avr 2011; 12(4): 1290– 7. 10.1021/bm101572j 21361277 · DOI
  29. [29]Leach RE, Burns JW, Dawe EJ, SmithBarbour MD, Diamond MP. Reduction of postsurgical adhesion formation in the rabbit uterine horn model with use of hyaluronate/carboxymethylcellulose gel. Fertil Steril. Mars 1998; 69(3): 415– 8. 9531869
  30. [30]Turgut A, Sak ME, Turkcu G, Ozler A, Soydinc HE, Evsen MS, et al Effect of caffeic acid phenethyl ester on intra-abdominal adhesion in rats. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2013; 75(4): 281– 8. 10.1159/000349893 23548785 · DOI
  31. [31]Hwang HJ, An MS, Ha TK, Kim KH, Kim TH, Choi CS, et al All the commercially available adhesion barriers have the same effect on adhesion prophylaxis?; A comparison of barrier agents using a newly developed, severe intra-abdominal adhesion model. Int J Colorectal Dis. Août 2013; 28(8): 1117– 25. 10.1007/s00384-013-1679-8 23588871 · DOI
  32. [32]Yang B, Gong C, Zhao X, Zhou S, Li Z, Qi X, et al Preventing postoperative abdominal adhesions in a rat model with PEG-PCL-PEG hydrogel. Int J Nanomedicine. 2012; 7: 547– 57. 10.2147/IJN.S26141 22346350 PMC3277435 · DOI
  33. [33]Yeo Y, Kohane DS. Polymers in the prevention of peritoneal adhesions. Eur J Pharm Biopharm Off J Arbeitsgemeinschaft Für Pharm Verfahrenstechnik EV. Janv 2008; 68(1): 57– 66. PMC2228410 17881201
  34. [34]Beck DE, Cohen Z, Fleshman JW, Kaufman HS, van Goor H, Wolff BG, et al A prospective, randomized, multicenter, controlled study of the safety of Seprafilm adhesion barrier in abdominopelvic surgery of the intestine. Dis Colon Rectum. 10 2003; 46(10): 1310– 9. 14530667
  35. [35]Becker JM, Dayton MT, Fazio VW, Beck DE, Stryker SJ, Wexner SD, et al Prevention of postoperative abdominal adhesions by a sodium hyaluronate-based bioresorbable membrane: a prospective, randomized, double-blind multicenter study. J Am Coll Surg. 10 1996; 183(4): 297– 306. 8843257
  36. [36]Cohen Z, Senagore AJ, Dayton MT, Koruda MJ, Beck DE, Wolff BG, et al 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. Juin 2005; 48(6): 1130– 9. 10.1007/s10350-004-0954-8 15868230 · DOI
  37. [37]Kusunoki M, Ikeuchi H, Yanagi H, Noda M, Tonouchi H, Mohri Y, et al Bioresorbable hyaluronate-carboxymethylcellulose membrane (Seprafilm) in surgery for rectal carcinoma: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Surg Today. 2005; 35(11): 940– 5. 10.1007/s00595-005-3061-0 16249848 · DOI
  38. [38]Fazio VW, Cohen Z, Fleshman JW, van Goor H, Bauer JJ, Wolff BG, et al Reduction in adhesive small-bowel obstruction by Seprafilm adhesion barrier after intestinal resection. Dis Colon Rectum. Janv 2006; 49(1): 1– 11. 10.1007/s10350-005-0268-5 16320005 · DOI
  39. [39]Tang C-L, Seow-Choen F, Fook-Chong S, Eu K-W. Bioresorbable adhesion barrier facilitates early closure of the defunctioning ileostomy after rectal excision: a prospective, randomized trial. Dis Colon Rectum. 9 2003; 46(9): 1200– 7. 12972964
  40. [40]Vrijland WW, Tseng LNL, Eijkman HJM, Hop WCJ, Jakimowicz JJ, Leguit P, et al Fewer intraperitoneal adhesions with use of hyaluronic acid-carboxymethylcellulose membrane: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Surg. Févr 2002; 235(2): 193– 9. 11807358 PMC1422414
  41. [41]Kumar S, Wong PF, Leaper DJ. Intra-peritoneal prophylactic agents for preventing adhesions and adhesive intestinal obstruction after non-gynaecological abdominal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;(1): CD005080 10.1002/14651858.CD005080.pub2 19160246 PMC13369267 · DOI
  42. [42]Arslan E, Talih T, Oz B, Halaclar B, Caglayan K, Sipahi M. Comparison of lovastatin and hyaluronic acid/carboxymethyl cellulose on experimental created peritoneal adhesion model in rats. Int J Surg Lond Engl. 2014; 12(2): 120– 4. 24316284
  43. [43]Takagi K, Araki M, Fukuoka H, Takeshita H, Hidaka S, Nanashima A, et al Novel powdered anti-adhesion material: preventing postoperative intra-abdominal adhesions in a rat model. Int J Med Sci. 2013; 10(4): 467– 74. 10.7150/ijms.5607 23470962 PMC3590608 · DOI
  44. [44]Saffer EM., Tew GN., Bhatia SR. Poly(lactic acid)-poly(ethylene oxide) Block Copolymers: New Directions in Self-Assembly and Biomedical Applications. Curr Med Chem. 1 Déc 2011; 18(36): 5676– 86. 22172072
  45. [45]Garric X, Garreau H, Vert M, Molès J-P. Behaviors of keratinocytes and fibroblasts on films of PLA50-PEO-PLA50 triblock copolymers with various PLA segment lengths. J Mater Sci Mater Med. Avr 2008; 19(4): 1645– 51. 10.1007/s10856-007-3232-1 17914633 · DOI
  46. [46]Ten Broek RPG, Kok-Krant N, Verhoeve HR, van Goor H, Bakkum EA. Efficacy of polyethylene glycol adhesion barrier after gynecological laparoscopic surgery: Results of a randomized controlled pilot study. Gynecol Surg. Févr 2012; 9(1): 29– 35. 10.1007/s10397-011-0698-0 22408577 PMC3285763 · DOI
  47. [47]De Iaco PA, Muzzupapa G, Bigon E, Pressato D, Donà M, Pavesio A, et al Efficacy of a hyaluronan derivative gel in postsurgical adhesion prevention in the presence of inadequate hemostasis. Surgery. Juill 2001; 130(1): 60– 4. 10.1067/msy.2001.115102 11436013 · DOI
  48. [48]Liu Z, Cheng S, Gu C, Pei H, Hong X. Effect of Hydrogen-Rich Saline on Postoperative Intra-Abdominal Adhesion Bands Formation in Mice. Med Sci Monit Int Med J Exp Clin Res. 11 11 2017; 23: 5363– 73. PMC5695092 29127274
  49. [49]Hinoki A, Saito A, Kinoshita M, Yamamoto J, Saitoh D, Takeoka S. Polylactic acid nanosheets in prevention of postoperative intestinal adhesion and their effects on bacterial propagation in an experimental model. Br J Surg. Mai 2016; 103(6): 692– 700. 10.1002/bjs.10122 26936491 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Allègre, L., Le Teuff, I., Leprince, S., Warembourg, S., Taillades, H., Garric, X., Letouzey, V., & Huberlant, S.
Affiliations
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • Université de Montpellier (FR)
Corresponding author
Allègre, Lucie
ORCID
Venue
PLOS ONE
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2018-11-05
Volume
13
Issue
11
Pages
e0202285
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0202285
PMC
PMC6218020
OpenAlex
W2899839828
Cited by
44
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 1
FWCI
3.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Société d’accélération de Transfert de Technologie AxLR
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Intestinal and Peritoneal Adhesions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Surgical Sutures and Adhesives
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hernia repair and management
Keywords
peritoneal adhesions, anti-adhesion barrier, polyethylene glycol, polylactic acid, postoperative complications, adhesion prevention, Seprafilm, rat model
MeSH terms
Tissue Adhesions, Animals, Disease Models, Animal, Female, Membranes, Artificial, Peritoneum, Polyesters, Polyethylene Glycols, Rats, Biodegradable Plastics

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