The study of morphofunctional changes in the gastrointestinal tract after various operations on the colon (an experiment in rats)
https://doi.org/10.31146/1682-8658-ecg-201-5-71-77
Abstract
Objective: modeling various types of surgical procedure in an experiment in rats, assessing the effect of surgery on the motility of the gastrointestinal tract (GIT).
Materials and methods: the study was carried out on 30 female Wistar rats weighing 200–250 grams, comparable in age, divided into 3 groups (10 animals each) in random order. group 1 — rats underwented to laparotomy (LT), group 2 — laparotomy, creation of a loop colostomy (LT + C), group 3 — laparotomy, a colonic single-row anastomosis (LT + A). Gastrointestinal motility was assessed using the gastrointestinal transit index (GTI), calculated by the formula: (length of the stained area of the intestine / total length of the intestine) x100, as well as by the results of a morphological study.
Results: surgery has a depressing effect on the motility of the gastrointestinal tract, while the maximum decrease in IHT was noted in the Colostomy group: 1.08±1.4% versus 2.3±3.3% in the Laparotomy group and versus 3.8±1.8% in the Anastomosis group. Comparison of the groups “Colostomy” and “Anastomosis” showed a significant difference in this feature — p=0.002.
Conclusion: modeling of various surgical procedure in rats made it possible to prove the relationship between the formation of a stoma and the inhibition of gastrointestinal motility, further study of this pattern will allow us to develop ways to prevent the development of postoperative ileus.
About the Authors
D. A. KhubezovRussian Federation
Dmitriy A. Khubezov, Doctor of Science in Medical Sciences, Professor of the Department of Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Postgraduate Education
390026, Ryazan, Vysokovol’tnaya, 9
O. V. Zajcev
Russian Federation
Oleg V. Zajcev, Doctor of Science in Medical Sciences, Head of the Department of Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Postgraduate Education, Head of Surgical Service
Researcher ID: R-6830–2016
390026, Ryazan, Vysokovol’tnaya, 9
390039, Ryazan, Internacional’naya, 3a
I. S. Ignatov
Russian Federation
Ivan S. Ignatov, Ph.D. of Medical Sciences, assistant of the Department of Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Postgraduate Education, Head of Oncology Department
390026, Ryazan, Vysokovol’tnaya, 9
390039, Ryazan, Internacional’naya, 3a
A. Y. Ogorel’cev
Russian Federation
Aleksandr Yu. Ogorel’cev, Ph.D. of Medical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Faculty Surgery with a course of anesthesiology and resuscitation, doctor of the Oncology Department
390026, Ryazan, Vysokovol’tnaya, 9
390039, Ryazan, Internacional’naya, 3a
Y. B. Li
Russian Federation
Yuliya B. Li, author for correspondence, doctor of the Oncology Department
Researcher ID: AAZ-9664–2021
390039, Ryazan, Internacional’naya, 3a
D. K. Puchkov
Russian Federation
Dmitriy K. Puchkov, Ph.D. of Medical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Postgraduate Education
390026, Ryazan, Vysokovol’tnaya, 9
S. V. Snegur
Russian Federation
Svetlana V. Snegur, Head of the Pathological department
390039, Ryazan, Internacional’naya, 3a
S. S. Burmistrova
Russian Federation
Svetlana S. Burmistrova, student of medical faculty, 5 year
390026, Ryazan, Vysokovol’tnaya, 9
T. I. Leukhina
Russian Federation
Tat’yana I. Leukhina, student of medical faculty, 4 year
390026, Ryazan, Vysokovol’tnaya, 9
References
1. Mattei P., Rombeau J. L. Review of the pathophysiology and management of postoperative ileus. World Journal of Surgery. 2006;30(8):1382–91. doi:10.1007/s00268–005–0613–9
2. Baig M.K., Wexner S. D. Postoperative ileus: a review. Dis Colon Rectum. 2004 Apr;47(4):516–26. doi:10.1007/s10350–003–0067–9. Epub 2004 Feb 25. Retraction in: Wexner SD. Dis Colon Rectum. 2005 Oct;48(10):1983. Retraction in: Dis Colon Rectum. 2005 Oct;48(10):1983.
3. Quiroga-Centeno A.C., Jerez-Torra K.A., Martin-Mojica P.A., et al. Risk Factors for Prolonged Postoperative Ileus in Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. World J Surg.. 2020 May;44(5):1612–1626. doi:10.1007/s00268–019–05366–4
4. Rybakov E.G., Shelygin Y. A., Khomyakov E. A., Zarodniuk I. V. Risk factors for postoperative ileus after colorectal cancer surgery. Colorectal Dis. 2017 Sep 16. doi:10.1111/codi.13888
5. Vather R., Trivedi S., Bissett I. Defining postoperative ileus: results of a systematic review and global survey. J Gastrointest Surg. 2013 May;17(5):962–72. doi:10.1007/s11605–013–2148-y
6. Chapuis P.H., Bokey L., Keshava A., Rickard M. J., Stewart P., Young C. J., Dent O. F. Risk factors for prolonged ileus after resection of colorectal cancer: an observational study of 2400 consecutive patients. Ann Surg. 2013 May;257(5):909–15. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e318268a693
7. Millan M., Biondo S., Fraccalvieri D., Frago R., Golda T., Kreisler E. Risk factors for prolonged postoperative ileus after colorectal cancer surgery. World J Surg. 2012 Jan;36(1):179–85. doi:10.1007/s00268–011–1339–5
8. Khubezov D.A., Sazhin V. P., Ignatov I. S., et al. Loop colostomy as a risk factor of postoperative ileus in elective colorectal cancer surgery. Pirogov Russian Journal of Surgery = Khirurgiya. Zurnal im. N. I. Pirogova. 2021;(12):56–62. (In Russ.). doi:10.17116/hirurgia202112156
9. Bian X., Zhou R., Yang Y., Li P., Hang Y., Hu Y., Yang L., Wen D. Divergent Effect of Dezocine, Morphine and Sufentanil on Intestinal Motor Function in Rats. Int J Med Sci. 2015 Oct 15;12(11):848–52. doi:10.7150/ijms.12616
10. Kalff J.C., Schraut W. H., Simmons R. L., Bauer A. J. Surgical manipulation of the gut elicits an intestinal muscularis inflammatory response resulting in postsurgical ileus. Ann Surg. 1998 Nov;228(5):652–63. doi:10.1097/00000658–199811000–00004
11. De Winter B. Y., Robberecht P., Boeckxstaens G. E., De Man J. G., Moreels T. G., Herman A. G., Pelckmans P. A. Role of VIP1/PACAP receptors in postoperative ileus in rats. Br J Pharmacol. 1998 Jul;124(6):1181–6. doi:10.1038/sj.bjp.0701954
12. Bauer A.J., Boeckxstaens G. E. Mechanisms of postoperative ileus. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2004 Oct;16 Suppl 2:54–60. doi:10.1111/j.1743–3150.2004.00558.x
13. Boeckxstaens G.E., de Jonge W. J. Neuroimmune mechanisms in postoperative ileus. Gut. 2009 Sep;58(9):1300–11. doi:10.1136/gut.2008.169250
14. Yasuhiro Komatsu, Kunitoshi Shigeyasu, Yoshiko Mori et al. Advanced T stage and thick rectus abdominis muscle triggers outlet obstruction and high-output stoma following ileostomy in patients with rectal cancer, 26 February 2020, PREPRINT (Version 1) available at Research Square. doi:10.21203/rs.2.24654/v1
15. Khubezov D.A., Ignatov I. S., Ogoreltsev A. Y., Li Y. B., Piksina A. B. Loop stoma as a risk factor of postoperative ileus in colorectal cancer surgery (review). Koloproktologia. 2022;21(1):117–124. (In Russ.) doi:10.33878/2073–7556–2022–21–1–117–124
16. Arykan N.G., Shestopalov A. E., Mitichkin A. E. et al. The efficacy of intrafascial transversus abdominis plane block for complex anesthesia in laparoscopic surgery. RMJ. 2019;11:38–43. (in Russ.)
17. Rozen W.M., Tran T. M.N., Barrington M. J., Ashton M. W. Avoiding denervation of the rectus abdominis muscle in DIEP flap harvest III: a functional study of the nerves to the rectus using anesthetic blockade. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009 Aug;124(2):519–522. doi:10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181addbee
18. Berthoud H.R., Neuhuber W. L. Functional and chemical anatomy of the aff erent vagal system. Auton Neurosci. 2000 Dec 20;85(1–3):1–17. doi:10.1016/S1566–0702(00)00215–0
19. Vather R., O’Grady G., Bissett I. P., Dinning P. G. Postoperative ileus: mechanisms and future directions for research. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 2014 May;41(5):358–70. doi:10.1111/1440–1681.12220
Review
For citations:
Khubezov D.A., Zajcev O.V., Ignatov I.S., Ogorel’cev A.Y., Li Y.B., Puchkov D.K., Snegur S.V., Burmistrova S.S., Leukhina T.I. The study of morphofunctional changes in the gastrointestinal tract after various operations on the colon (an experiment in rats). Experimental and Clinical Gastroenterology. 2022;(5):71-77. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31146/1682-8658-ecg-201-5-71-77