Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England logoLink to Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England
. 1993 Mar;75(2):123–128.

General surgeons' attitudes to the treatment and prevention of abdominal adhesions.

D M Scott-Coombes 1, M N Vipond 1, J N Thompson 1
PMCID: PMC2497791  PMID: 8476180

Abstract

A questionnaire survey of general surgeons was undertaken to estimate the incidence of abdominal adhesions as a clinical problem and to establish current attitudes to the treatment of adhesional bowel obstruction and the prevention of adhesion formation. Replies were received from 362 of 416 surgeons (response rate 87%). In all, 76% (95% confidence limits, 72%-80%) of surgeons operate upon at least two patients each year with adhesional small bowel obstruction and 31% (26-36) operate upon more than five patients. More than five patients are admitted each year with suspected adhesional bowel obstruction by 64% (59-69) of surgeons and 35% (30-40) of surgeons found adhesions to be a problem during a non-adhesion-related laparotomy in more than five patients each year. This represents an estimated annual incidence of between 12,000 and 14,000 adhesion-related clinical problems in the United Kingdom. A number of preventive measures, such as the wearing of starch-free gloves (78% of surgeons; 95% CL 74%-82%), peritoneal lavage (68%; 63-73) and placement of the omentum beneath the wound closure (90%; 87-93) are generally accepted, whereas routine wetting of swabs (39%; 34-44) and the role of non-essential adhesiolysis (49%; 44-54) are controversial. Routine small bowel plication (1%; 0-2) and intubation (2%; 0-5) are rarely used. This survey gives an indication of the large burden on patients and the health services caused by abdominal adhesions, and demonstrates surgeons' wide variety of approaches to both the treatment and prevention of adhesion formation.

Full text

PDF
123

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Brightwell N. L., McFee A. S., Aust J. B. Bowel obstruction and the long tube stent. Arch Surg. 1977 Apr;112(4):505–511. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.1977.01370040157024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Buckman R. F., Jr, Buckman P. D., Hufnagel H. V., Gervin A. S. A physiologic basis for the adhesion-free healing of deperitonealized surfaces. J Surg Res. 1976 Aug;21(2):67–76. doi: 10.1016/0022-4804(76)90064-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. DiZerega G. S., Hodger G. D. Prevention of postoperative tubal adhesions. Comparative study of commonly used agents. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1980 Jan 15;136(2):173–178. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(80)90591-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Down R. H., Whitehead R., Watts J. M. Do surgical packs cause peritoneal adhesions? Aust N Z J Surg. 1979 Jun;49(3):379–382. doi: 10.1111/j.1445-2197.1979.tb07688.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Elkins T. E., Ling F. W., Ahokas R. A., Abdella T. N., Homsey C. A., Malinak L. R. Adhesion prevention by solutions of sodium carboxymethylcellulose in the rat. II. Fertil Steril. 1984 Jun;41(6):929–932. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)47910-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Ellis H., Heddle R. Does the peritoneum need to be closed at laparotomy? Br J Surg. 1977 Oct;64(10):733–736. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800641013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Ellis H. The hazards of surgical glove dusting powders. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1990 Dec;171(6):521–527. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Evans S. J. Good surveys guide. BMJ. 1991 Feb 9;302(6772):302–303. doi: 10.1136/bmj.302.6772.302. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Fraser I. Simple and effective method of removing starch powder from surgical gloves. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1982 Jun 19;284(6332):1835–1835. doi: 10.1136/bmj.284.6332.1835. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Holtz G. Failure of a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agent (ibuprofen) to inhibit peritoneal adhesion reformation after lysis. Fertil Steril. 1982 Apr;37(4):582–583. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)46171-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Holtz G. Prevention and management of peritoneal adhesions. Fertil Steril. 1984 Apr;41(4):497–507. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)47768-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Hull M. G., Glazener C. M., Kelly N. J., Conway D. I., Foster P. A., Hinton R. A., Coulson C., Lambert P. A., Watt E. M., Desai K. M. Population study of causes, treatment, and outcome of infertility. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1985 Dec 14;291(6510):1693–1697. doi: 10.1136/bmj.291.6510.1693. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Jagelman D. G., Ellis H. Starch and intraperitoneal adhesion formation. Br J Surg. 1973 Feb;60(2):111–114. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800600204. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Krukowski Z. H., Matheson N. A. The management of peritoneal and parietal contamination in abdominal surgery. Br J Surg. 1983 Jul;70(7):440–441. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800700717. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. LEE C. M., Jr, COLLINS W. T., LARGEN T. L. A reappraisal of absorbable glove powder. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1952 Dec;95(6):725–737. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Larsson B., Perbeck L. The possible advantage of keeping the uterine and intestinal serosa irrigated with saline to prevent intraabdominal adhesions in operations for fertility. An experimental study in rats. Acta Chir Scand Suppl. 1986;530:15–18. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Luengo J., van Hall E. V. Prevention of peritoneal adhesions by the combined use of spongostan and 32% dextran 70: an experimental study in pigs. Fertil Steril. 1978 Apr;29(4):447–450. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)43223-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. McEntee G. P., Stuart R. C., Byrne P. J., Leen E., Hennessy T. P. Experimental study of starch-induced intraperitoneal adhesions. Br J Surg. 1990 Oct;77(10):1113–1114. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800771012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. McEntee G., Pender D., Mulvin D., McCullough M., Naeeder S., Farah S., Badurdeen M. S., Ferraro V., Cham C., Gillham N. Current spectrum of intestinal obstruction. Br J Surg. 1987 Nov;74(11):976–980. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800741105. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Menzies D., Ellis H. The role of plasminogen activator in adhesion prevention. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1991 May;172(5):362–366. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Munro A., Jones P. F. Operative intubation in the treatment of complicated small bowel obstruction. Br J Surg. 1978 Feb;65(2):123–127. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800650216. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Nelson I. W., Ellis H. The spectrum of intestinal obstruction today. Br J Clin Pract. 1984 Jul-Aug;38(7-8):249–251. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Neuwirth R. S., Khalaf S. M. Effect of thirty-two per cent dextran 70 on peritoneal adhesion formation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1975 Feb 1;121(3):420–422. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(75)90025-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. O'Leary D. P., Coakley J. B. The influence of suturing and sepsis on the development of postoperative peritoneal adhesions. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1992 Mar;74(2):134–137. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Phillips R. K., Dudley H. A. The effect of tetracycline lavage and trauma on visceral and parietal peritoneal ultrastructure and adhesion formation. Br J Surg. 1984 Jul;71(7):537–539. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800710722. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Raftery A. T. Effect of peritoneal trauma on peritoneal fibrinolytic activity and intraperitoneal adhesion formation. An experimental study in the rat. Eur Surg Res. 1981;13(6):397–401. doi: 10.1159/000128208. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Rappaport W. D., Holcomb M., Valente J., Chvapil M. Antibiotic irrigation and the formation of intraabdominal adhesions. Am J Surg. 1989 Nov;158(5):435–437. doi: 10.1016/0002-9610(89)90281-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Somell A. Mesenteric plication in the treatment of adhesive intestinal obstruction. Acta Chir Scand. 1978;144(4):255–259. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Stewardson R. H., Bombeck C. T., Nyhus L. M. Critical operative management of small bowel obstruction. Ann Surg. 1978 Feb;187(2):189–193. doi: 10.1097/00000658-197802000-00017. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Stewart D. J., Matheson N. A. Peritoneal lavage in faecal peritonitis in the rat. Br J Surg. 1978 Jan;65(1):57–59. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800650116. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Thompson J. N., Paterson-Brown S., Harbourne T., Whawell S. A., Kalodiki E., Dudley H. A. Reduced human peritoneal plasminogen activating activity: possible mechanism of adhesion formation. Br J Surg. 1989 Apr;76(4):382–384. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800760422. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Walker E. M. Effects of blood, bile and starch in the peritoneal cavity of the rat. J Anat. 1978 Aug;126(Pt 3):495–507. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England are provided here courtesy of The Royal College of Surgeons of England

RESOURCES