Can platelet-rich plasma be used safely in intra-abdominal operations?

In this study, it was aimed to investigate whether or not platelet‑rich plasma (PRP) causes intra-abdominal adhesions and therefore, whether or not PRP can be used safely in intra-abdominal operations. Of the total of 35 animals, 5 were used as donors for the preparation of platelet‑rich plasma (PRP...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	Bratislavské lékarské listy Vol. 117; no. 9; pp. 525 - 529
Main Authors:	Kaya, F, Kismet, K, Ozer, H, Soylu, V G, Duymus, M E, Akgun, Y A, Demir, A, Celepli, P, Guclu, T, Bolat, S, Ertas, E
Format:	Journal Article
Language:	English
Published:	Slovakia 2016
Subjects:	Abdomen - surgery Abdominal Cavity - pathology Abdominal Cavity - surgery Animals Cecum Female Male Peritoneum - pathology Peritoneum - surgery Platelet-Rich Plasma Postoperative Complications - etiology Postoperative Complications - pathology Rats Rats, Wistar Risk Factors Tissue Adhesions - etiology Tissue Adhesions - pathology intra-abdominal operations rats adhesions platelet rich plasma
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	In this study, it was aimed to investigate whether or not platelet‑rich plasma (PRP) causes intra-abdominal adhesions and therefore, whether or not PRP can be used safely in intra-abdominal operations. Of the total of 35 animals, 5 were used as donors for the preparation of platelet‑rich plasma (PRP). The surgical procedures were performed on the remaining 30 animals. These rats were randomized and divided into 3 groups of 10. In Group 1, no adhesion induction was performed. Adhesion was induced by cecal abrasion and peritoneal resection model in Groups II and IIII. In Group 2, no treatment was given. In Group 3, 1 cc PRP was applied on the cecum. The rats were sacrificed on postoperative day 21. According to adhesion scores, the difference between the sham and PRP groups was not statistically significant. There was also no significant difference between the control and PRP groups, but the adhesion scores in the PRP group was lower than those in the control group. On histopathological evaluation, the difference between the sham and PRP groups was not statistically significant. There was also no significant difference between the control and PRP groups, but the average fibrosis and inflammation scores in the PRP group were lower than those in the control group. The results of the present study have demonstrated that PRP neither reduced nor exacerbated postoperative adhesions. Thus, PRP can be used safely in experimental and clinical studies where it will be applied intra-abdominally (Tab. 2, Fig. 3, Ref. 11).
Bibliography:	ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23
ISSN:	0006-9248
DOI:	10.4149/BLL_2016_102