Evaluation of different surgical techniques to repair iatrogenic esophageal injury; an experimental study

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorIs, M.
dc.contributor.authorPehlivan, M.
dc.contributor.authorAkyüz, F.
dc.contributor.authorCelikoglu, E.
dc.contributor.authorGökce, A.
dc.contributor.authorAytekin, H.
dc.contributor.authorAltay, T.
dc.date.accessioned2024-09-29T16:21:25Z
dc.date.available2024-09-29T16:21:25Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.departmentKarabük Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractObjective: Esophageal perforation during anterior spine surgery is a rare but serious complication that may lead to death, if not managed properly. Optimal management of these injuries is still debated, which varies from conservative approach to different types of surgical repair. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the healing process following various surgical techniques to repair experimentally induced esophageal injury in rodents. We hypothesized that repair techniques that involve flap rotation along with primary suture was superior to primary suture alone. Material and Methods: Fifty male Sprague-Dawley rats were used for this study. Esophageal injury was induced by a vertical incision through all layers of its wall. Groups were determined according to the repair techniques used, i.e., Group-1 (sham, no injury), Group-2 (primary suture), Group 3 (primary suture plus muscle flap), Group 4 (primary suture omental flap) and Group 5 (untreated). Esophageal segments repaired were obtained fourteen days after the injury/repair surgery for histopathological evaluation. Results: Total histopathological damage scores were highest in Group 5. Lower total scores were obtained in Group 3 than in Group 2 and 5, whereas total scores between Groups 2 and 4, 2 and 5, and 3 and 4 were similar. Infiltration and submucosal/muscular healing scores were higher in Group 2 than in 3. There was no difference in any of the parameters between groups 2 and 4, 2 and 5, and 3 and 4. Conclusions: Primary suture closure reinforced by a muscle flap provides better healing in a rat model of iatrogenic esophageal injury. Primary suture reinforced by omentum, or primary suture alone may be considered as second options for repair. © 2015, Ege University Press. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.identifier.endpage755en_US
dc.identifier.issn1300-1817
dc.identifier.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84952915401en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityN/Aen_US
dc.identifier.startpage747en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14619/9754
dc.identifier.volume32en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherEge University Pressen_US
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Neurological Sciencesen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectAnterior Cervical Fusionen_US
dc.subjectEsophagusen_US
dc.subjectPerforationen_US
dc.subjectRepairen_US
dc.subjectSternocleidomastoiden_US
dc.titleEvaluation of different surgical techniques to repair iatrogenic esophageal injury; an experimental studyen_US
dc.title.alternativeIatrojenik özofagus yaralanmasının onarımına yönelik farklı cerrahi tekniklerin karşılaştırılması: Deneysel bir çalışmaen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu