Adhesion barriers in clinical practice: personalization of patient management

• Mekan R. Orazov
• Lyudmila M. Mikhaleva
• Sevindj Ya. Ismailzade

Abstract

The adhesive process is an urgent problem of operative gynecology. The number of women suffering from complications of the adhesive process is growing every year, not to mention the deaths associated with this problem. Polygenic etiology, low efficiency of treatment of the adhesion process determined the priority of searching for methods to prevent the process of adhesion formation or, at least, to reduce the severity of postoperative adhesion, at least a decrease in the severity of postoperative adhesion. The review presents the current paradigm of the pathogenesis of the formation of postoperative adhesions and the possibility of preventing adhesive disorders in gynecological patients.

Keywords:intrauterine adhesion; adhesive disease; antiadhesin

REFERENCES

1. Okabayashi K., Ashrafi an H., Zacharakis E., Hasegawa H., Kitagawa Y., Athanasiou T., et al. Adhesions after abdominal surgery: a systematic review of the incidence, distribution and severity. Surg Today. 2014; 44: 405–20.

2. Coccolini F., Ansaloni L., Manfredi R., et al. Peritoneal adhesion index (PAI): proposal of a score for the «ignored iceberg» of medicine and surgery. World J Emerg Surg. 2013; 8 (1): 6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1749-7922-8-6

3. De Wilde R.L., Brolmann H., Koninckx P.R., et al. Prevention of adhesions in gynaecological surgery: the 2012 European field guideline. Gynecol Surg. 2012; 9 (4): 365-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10397-012-0764-2

4. Ray N.F., Denton W.G., Thamer M., Henderson S.C., Perry S. Abdominal adhe-siolysis: inpatient care and expenditures in the United States in 1994. J Am Coll Surg. 1998; 186 (1): 1-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s1072-7515(97)00127-0

5. De Wilde R.L., Brolmann H., Koninckx P.R., et al. Prevention of adhesions in gynaecological surgery: the 2012 European field guideline. Gynecol Surg. 2012; 9 (4): 365-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10397-012-0764-2

6. Lutsevich O.E., Akimov V.P., Shirinsky V.G., Bichev A.A. Adhesive disease of the peritoneum: a modern view of pathogenesis and treatment. Khirurgiya. Zhurnal imeni N.I. Pirogova [Surgery. The Journal Named after N.I. Pirogov]. 2017; (10): 100-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17116/hirurgia201710100-108 (in Russian)

7. Kovacs E.J., DiPietro L.A. Fibrogenic cytokines and connective tissue production. FASEB J. 1994; 8 (11): 854-61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1096/fasebj.8.11.7520879

8. Zeyneloglu H.B., Senturk L.M., Seli E., et al. The role of monocyte chemotactic protein-1 in intraperitoneal adhesion formation. Hum Reprod. 1998; 13 (5): 1194-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/13.5.1194

9. Kovacs E.J. Fibrogenic cytokines: the role of immune mediators in the development of scar tissue. Immunol Today. 1991; 12 (1): 17-23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-5699(91)90107-5

10. Fernandez H., Benifla J.L., Fritel X., et al. Post-curettage and aspiration syn-echiae: is there value in an anti-adhesion agent? J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2012; 41 (2): 8-12.

11. Snimshchikova I.A., Medvedev A.I., Khalilov M.A., et. al. Theoretical and clinical aspects of excessive adhesion. Vestnik RGMU [Bulletin of RSMU]. 2008; 4: 99-102. (in Russian)

12. Oosterlynck D.J., Lacquet F.A., Waer M., Koninckx P.R. Lymphokinactivated killer activity in women with endometriosis. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 1994; 37 (3): 18590. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000292556

13. Burlev V.A., Dubinskaya E.D., Gasparov A.S., Ilyasova N.A. Antiangiogenic therapy and adhesions in the small pelvis: prospects for prevention and treatment. Rossiyskiy vestnik akushera-ginekologa [Russian Bulletin of Obstetrician-Gynecologist]. 2010; 10 (4): 25-31. (in Russian)

14. Tabibian N., Swehli E., Boyd A., et al. Abdominal adhesions: A practical review of an often overlooked entity. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2017; 15: 9-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2017.01.021

15. Sabry D., Mostafa A., Mekawey D., et al. An experimental model: intrauterine adhesion versus subendometrial fibrosis. Biomed Res. 2018; 29 (17): 3311-8.

16. Fritsch H. Ein Fall von volligen Schwund der Gebaumutterhohle nach Auskratzung. Zentralbl Gynaekol. 1894; 18: 1337-42.

17. Asherman J.G. Traumatic intra-uterine adhesions. J Obstet Gynaecol Br Emp. 1948; 57 (6): 892-96.

18. Yu D., Wong Y.M., Cheong Y., Xia E., Li T.C. Asherman syndrome-one century later. Fertil Steril. 2008; 89: 759-79.

19. Lin S., Xie X., Guo Y., Zhang H., Liu C., Yi J., et al. Clinical characteristics and pregnancy outcomes of infertile patients with endometriosis and endometrial polyps: a retrospective cohort study. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2020; 59: 916-21.

20. Owusu-Akyaw A., Krishnamoorthy K., Goldsmith L.T., Morelli S.S. The role of mesenchymal-epithelial transition in endometrial function. Hum Reprod Update. 2019; 25: 114-33.

21. Yu D., Wong Y.M., Cheong Y., Xia E., Li T.C. Asherman syndrome-one century later. Fertil Steril. 2008; 89: 759-79.

22. March C.M. Asherman’s syndrome. Semin Reprod Med. 2011; 29 (2): 83-94.

23. Diegelmann R.F., Evans M.C. Wound healing: an overview of acute, fibrotic and delayed healing. Front Biosci. 2004; 9: 283-9.

24. Chen J.X., Yi X.J., Gu P.L., Gao S.X. The role of KDR in intrauterine adhesions may involve the TGF-01/Smads signaling pathway. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2019; 52 (10): e8324.

25. Li J., Cen B., Chen S., He Y. MicroRNA-29b inhibits TGF-p1- induced fibrosis via regulation of the TGF-01/Smad pathway in primary human endometrial stromal cells. Mol Med Rep. 2016; 13 (5): 4229-37.

26. Van Beek J.P., Kennedy L., Rockel J.S., Bernier S.M., Leask A. The induction of CCN2 by TGFp1 involves Ets-1. Arthritis Res Ther. 2006; 8 (2): R36.

27. Evans J., Salamonsen L.A., Winship A., Menkhorst E., Nie G., Gargett C.E., et al. Fertile ground: Human endometrial programming and lessons in health and disease. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2016; 12: 654-67.

28. Zhou Q., Shi X., Saravelos S., Huang X., Zhao Y., Huang R., et al. Auto-cross-linked hyaluronic acid gel for prevention of intrauterine adhesions after hysteroscopic adhe-siolysis: a randomized controlled trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2021; 28: 307-13.

29. Lin X., Wei M., Li T.C., Huang Q., Huang D., Zhou F., et al. A comparison of intrauterine balloon, intrauterine contraceptive device and hyaluronic acid gel in the prevention of adhesion reformation following hysteroscopic surgery for Asherman syndrome: a cohort study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013; 170: 512-6.

30. Zhu R., Duan H., Gan L., Wang S. Comparison of intrauterine suitable balloon and Foley balloon in the prevention of adhesion after hysteroscopic adhesiolysis. Biomed Res Int. 2018; 2018: 9494101.

31. Lee W.L., Lee F.K., Wang P.H. Application of hyaluronic acid in patients with interstitial cystitis. J Chin Med Assoc. 2021; 84: 341-3.

32. Friedman J.A., Wong J.M.K., Chaudhari A., Tsai S., Milad M.P. Hysteroscopic myomectomy: a comparison of techniques and review of current evidence in the management of abnormal uterine bleeding. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2018; 30: 243-51.

33. Annes J.P., Munger J.S., Rifkin D.B. Making sense of latent TGF-beta activation. J Cell Sci. 2003; 116 (2): 217-24.

34. Handbook of drugs radar. Antiadhesion gel protivoraketnyi absorbable sterile, 2021 [updated 03.10.2021; quoted 29.10.2021]. URL: http://www.rlsnet.ru/pcr_tn_id_81752.htm (in Russian)]

35. Kim T., Ahn K.H., Choi D.S., et al. A randomized, multi-center, clinical trial to assess the efficacy and safety of alginate carboxymethylcellulose hyaluronic acid compared to carboxymethylcellulose hyaluronic acid to prevent postoperative intrauterine adhesion. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2012; 19: 731-6.

All articles in our journal are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0 license)