» Articles » PMID: 21571307

Flow Through a Mechanical Distraction Enterogenesis Device: a Pilot Test

Overview
Journal J Surg Res
Specialty General Surgery
Date 2011 May 17
PMID 21571307
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: We tested the coupling portion of a prototype intraluminal distraction enterogenesis device to allow flow-through of simulated enteric contents (SEC) in both pig and human jejunum.

Materials And Methods: SEC was made using 80% corn syrup. Ten-cm pig and human intestinal segments had a spoke-shaped 2.2 cm coupling adaptor sutured in place, intraluminally. The adaptor had a flow-through area of 33.6 mm(2). SEC was pumped into the proximal part of the intestinal segment at 0.083 mL/s. The times to first passage of SEC through the coupler (first drop), 10 mL, and 20 mL of SEC eluted from the distal end were recorded.

Results: Mean time to first drop elution was 155 ± 38 s with pig, and 149 ± 22 s with human bowel (P = 0.8). This corresponded to a hydrostatic pressure of 37.5 mmHg before the initial drop passed through. Mean flow rates were 0.094 mL/s in pig bowel and 0.084 mL/s in human bowel (P = 0.09). To account for occlusion from luminal debris, a 75% occlusion of coupler holes was studied in the smaller pig bowel to investigate if reductions in flow-through area could be tolerated. Mean time to first drop increased slightly to 171 ± 15 s, but the elution rate stayed the same (P = 0.5).

Conclusions: After a physiologic level of initial pressure buildup allowing the first drop of SEC to pass the coupling adaptor, our prototype intestinal coupling adaptor did not obstruct flow-through of SEC, even after a 75% decrease in flow-through area. This type of attachment represents a viable approach to placing a device in-continuity without obstructing flow of enteric contents.

Citing Articles

Development of a novel approach to safely couple the intestine to a distraction-induced device for intestinal growth: use of reconstructive tissue matrix.

Ralls M, Sueyoshi R, Herman R, Utter B, Czarnocki I, Luntz J Pediatr Surg Int. 2012; 29(2):151-6.

PMID: 23108982 PMC: 3557585. DOI: 10.1007/s00383-012-3198-z.

References
1.
Spencer A, Sun X, El-Sawaf M, Haxhija E, Brei D, Luntz J . Enterogenesis in a clinically feasible model of mechanical small-bowel lengthening. Surgery. 2006; 140(2):212-20. PMC: 1764912. DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2006.03.005. View

2.
Miyasaka E, Okawada M, Utter B, Mustafa-Maria H, Luntz J, Brei D . Application of distractive forces to the small intestine: defining safe limits. J Surg Res. 2010; 163(2):169-75. PMC: 2943053. DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2010.03.060. View

3.
Dite P, Lata J, Novotny I . Intestinal obstruction and perforation--the role of the gastroenterologist. Dig Dis. 2003; 21(1):63-7. DOI: 10.1159/000071341. View

4.
Kim H, Lee P, Garza J, Duggan C, Fauza D, Jaksic T . Serial transverse enteroplasty for short bowel syndrome: a case report. J Pediatr Surg. 2003; 38(6):881-5. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3468(03)00115-5. View

5.
Chang P, Mendoza J, Park J, Lam M, Wu B, Atkinson J . Sustainability of mechanically lengthened bowel in rats. J Pediatr Surg. 2006; 41(12):2019-22. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2006.08.014. View