Search

Oxygen is an important factor for wound healing. Although several different therapies investigated the use of oxygen to aid wound healing, the results of these studies are not unequivocal. This systematic review summarizes the clinical and experimental studies regarding different oxygen therapies for promoting wound healing, and evaluates the outcomes according the methodological details. A systematic literature search was conducted using Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane, PubMed publisher, and Google Scholar libraries. Clinical and experimental studies investigating oxygen for wound healing were selected. Included articles were categorized according to the kind of therapy, study design, and wound type. The methodological details were extracted and analyzed. Sixty-five articles were identified and divided in three different oxygen therapies: Local oxygen therapy, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, and supplemental inspired oxygen therapy. More than half of the included local oxygen and hyperbaric oxygen studies had one or more significant positive outcomes, 77 and 63%, respectively. Supplemental inspired oxygen therapy during gastrointestinal and vascular surgery was more likely to have a positive result than during other surgical interventions reducing surgical site infections. These many positive outcomes promote the use of oxygen treatment in the stimulation of wound healing. However, the lack of clinical studies and vast methodological diversity made it impossible to perform a proper comparison within and between the different therapies. Further randomized clinical studies are warranted to examine the value of these therapies, especially studies that investigate the more patient-friendly oxygen dressings and topical wound oxygen therapies. Also, to achieve more solid and consistent data, studies should use more standardized methods and subjects.

Background: Tissue adhesives may be useful for sealing bowel anastomoses by preventing anastomotic leakage. Prior to clinical implementation, an in-depth analysis of the clinical and immunohistopathological effects of tissue adhesives on the target tissue and of the mechanical strength of the adhesive bond in an in vivo model is needed. Materials and methods: In 84 rats, two bowel segments were glued using one of the following tissue adhesive: Bioglue, Gelatin-resorcinol-formaldehyde (GRF), Glubran 2, Histoacryl Flex, Omnex, Duraseal Xact, or Tissucol. Rats were followed for 7 or 28 days. Endpoints were clinical complication rate, mechanical strength, and immunohistopathological reactions. Results: Of the seven tissue adhesives, GRF and Bioglue showed the highest rates of bowel wall destruction and ileus and the most severe immunohistopathological tissue reactions at 7 and 28 days. Cyanoacrylates (Histoacryl Flex, Omnex, Glubran 2) showed high mechanical strength and mild immunohistopathological reactions at 7 and 28 days. Duraseal Xact and Tissucol were the most inert tissue adhesives, but exhibited low mechanical strength. At 28 days, mechanical strength was significantly correlated to CD8, CD68, and Ki67 cell counts. Conclusion: Based on the clinical and immunohistopathological outcomes, GRF and Bioglue were found to be the least suitable tissue adhesives for colonic use. Duraseal Xact and Tissucol were inert but also showed low mechanical strength. Cyanoacrylates exhibited mild clinical and immunohistopathological effects while maintaining high strength, which makes them promising as colonic sealants.