OBJECTIVE: Postsurgical abdominal adhesions are common, serious postoperative complications. The present study compared the usefulness of 4% icodextrin and canola oil in preventing postoperative peritoneal adhesions. METHODS: Twenty-four Wistar albino rats were divided into three groups. Following a laparotomy, a serosal abrasion was made by brushing the cecum, and 3 mL of 0.9% NaCl, 4% icodextrin, or 3 mL of canola oil were intraperitoneally administered for the control, icodextrin, and canola oil groups, respectively. The abdomen was then closed. All of the rats were sacrificed at day 10. Macroscopic, histopathological, and biochemical evaluations were performed. The results were statistically analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and ANOVA tests. RESULTS: Macroscopic analyses revealed that both canola oil and 4% icodextrin reduced adhesion formation, but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.17). The histopathological examinations revealed no significant differences in terms of giant cell, lymphocyte/plasmocyte, neutrophil, ICAM1, or PECAM1 scores. However, both canola oil and 4% icodextrin significantly reduced fibrosis (p = 0.025). In the canola oil group, the histiocytic reactions were significantly increased (p = 0.001), and the hydroxyproline levels were significantly lower than those in the other groups (p = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, canola oil was determined to be superior to 4% icodextrin in lowering hydroxyproline levels and increasing histiocytic reactions. Considering these results, we believe that canola oil is a promising agent for preventing adhesion formation.

INTRODUCTION: Evaluation of pre- and postoperative serum CEA levels together has seldom been assessed for the prognosis of colorectal cancer (CRC). OBJECTIVE: To concurrently evaluate pre- and postoperative CEA as factors of relapse and survival. METHODS: The study consisted of 114 patients who had undergone surgery from February 2002 to June 2006 for CRC. All patients were classified into four groups according to their pre- and postoperative CEA levels. Data obtained for clinicopathologic parameters, lymph node metastasis, stage, recurrence, and CEA levels were analyzed to determine their association with survival. Multivariate analysis by the Cox proportional hazard regression model was performed to identify the independent prognostic factors associated with survival. RESULTS: Postoperative serum CEA levels remained high in Group 3 (n = 32). Nineteen patients (59.3%) demonstrated a detectable cause for persistent high CEA levels, while the reasons for those in the other thirteen patients (40.6%) remained obscure. Abnormal preoperative CEA levels significantly correlated with the depth of tumor invasion, lymph node metastasis, TNM stage, and recurrence (p < 0.05). Abnormal postoperative CEA levels were significantly related to the depth of tumor invasion, TNM stage, and postoperative relapse (p<0.05). Patients in Group 3 demonstrated the worst survival rate. Abnormal postoperative CEA levels, lymph node metastasis, and location of the tumor were independent prognostic factors for survival. CONCLUSION: The survival of patients with high postoperative CEA levels due to unknown reasons may be extended if they are exhaustively tested with sensitive diagnostic methods and treated at an early stage.