Colonic anastomosis can be protected from ischemia reperfusion injury with intra-peritoneal Montelukast treatment.

BACKGROUND: Ischemia reperfusion injury is unavoidable in the setting of transplantation and may lead to primary dysfunction of the transplanted organ. Similarly, intestinal ischemia reperfusion injury may have deleterious effects causing intestinal failure. Montelukast is a selective reversible cysteinyl-leukotriene type 1 receptor antagonist used in clinical practice for its anti-inflammatory effects. In this study, we investigated the effects of Montelukast on colon anastomosis performed after intestinal ischemia reperfusion injury. METHODS: 40 adult male Wistar Albino rats were used. All rats underwent intestinal ischemia reperfusion injury. Afterwards, the entire group was divided into two for either right or left colonic resection and anastomosis. Rats in the control groups were given intra-peritoneal normal saline for 1 week while the animals in the treatment groups were given intra-peritoneal Montelukast (10 mg/kg; 1 ml). All animals were subjected to ischemia reperfusion injury followed by either right or left colonic segmental resection and anastomosis in the first day of the experiment. On postoperative day 7 adhesion scoring, anastomotic bursting pressure, anastomotic tissue hydroxyproline content were assessed for all groups. RESULTS: Significant differences were detected in adhesion scores between the treatment and control groups regardless of the colonic resection site. Anastomotic bursting pressures and hydroxyproline content of the anastomotic sites were significantly higher in the treatment groups when compared with the control groups. Anastomotic tissues treated with Montelukast showed more prominent vascularization in histopathological examinations. CONCLUSION: Montelukast has a potential to attenuate the detrimental effects of ischemia reperfusion injury on intestinal anastomosis.

Surgeons' approach toward clinical nutrition: A survey-based study.

OBJECTIVE: Although many surgical patients face postoperative problems due to a poor nutritional status, there is evidence that many cases of malnutrition still go unnoticed and untreated in surgical wards. This study aims to define the current attitudes of surgeons toward nutritional screening and support. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A questionnaire with 13 questions was e-mailed to 1500 surgeons. Cross-queries were made over the responses. RESULTS: The response rate was 20.9%. Most of the respondents (89.5%) implemented nutritional screening. However, only 24.6% of these surgeons screened every patient for malnutrition. The time to initiate nutritional support varied among respondents, and only 25.5% started nutritional support early enough prior to surgery. Only 9.9% of respondents implemented evidence based practices for preoperative fasting, and 21.2% preferred immunonutrition products for patients undergoing major abdominal surgery for cancer. The responses of surgeons, who participated in at least one scientific meeting on nutrition per year, were more coherent with the nutrition guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study reveal that the awareness and knowledge of clinical nutrition need improving amongst surgeons. To increase this awareness and knowledge, continuous learning throughout their career seems essential.