Abstract
Introduction:
Bowel injury is an uncommon, although potentially devastating, intraoperative laparoscopic complication. Questions have been raised about the possible use of a tissue adhesive to repair injured bowel. We compared glued repair and sutured repair of both large bowel (LB) and small bowel (SB) electrosurgical injuries in a rabbit model.
Methods:
Pneumoperitoneum was obtained, and four laparoscopic ports were placed in each of 48 New Zealand rabbits. The hook electrode was used in a specified manner to create an equal number of uniform full-thickness injuries to either the SB or the LB. Laparoscopic repair was performed with a 3-0 silk Lembert suture (LS), fibrin glue (FG), or BioGlue (BG), or repair was not performed (i.e., no repair, NR); the animals were monitored for 3 weeks. Adverse clinical outcomes and findings at laparotomy were recorded. Pathologic assessment included an objective scaled evaluation of the intensity of the inflammatory response and degree of healing.
Results:
In the SB injury group, deteriorating clinical condition necessitated early euthanasia in one animal repaired with FG, one animal repaired with BG, and two animals with NR. LS repair animals had no adverse clinical outcomes. The LB injury group had no adverse clinical outcomes regardless of the method of repair, including the control group. Of the animals that survived for 3 weeks, the animals repaired with BG had more intraabdominal adhesions (100%) than LS (33%), FG (55%), and NR (50%) (p = 0.001). The pathologic assessment revealed that BG induced a more intense inflammatory response (p < 0.05).
Conclusion:
In the rabbit, suture repair of an electrosurgical SB injury appears to have improved outcomes when compared with a glued repair. In contrast, LB injury responded well to any form of treatment. The data suggest that suture is superior to biological glues when dealing with a laparoscopic electrosurgical bowel injury.