None of the techniques that were compared significantly reduced the incidence of adhesive small bowel obstruction .
None of the specific techniques that were compared reduced the two main adhesion-related clinical outcomes , small bowel obstruction and infertility .
The meta- analysis provides little evidence for the surgical principle that using less invasive techniques , introducing less foreign bodies or causing less ischaemia reduces the extent and severity of adhesions
INTRODUCTION Adhesion formation is the most common complication following  peritoneal surgery  and the leading cause of small bowel obstruction , acquired infertility and inadvertent organ injury at reoperation .
Using a ' good surgical technique ' is advocated as a first step in preventing adhesions .
However , the evidence for different surgical techniques to reduce adhesion formation needs confirmation .
Reduction in Adhesive Small-Bowel Obstruction by Seprafilm® Adhesion Barrier After Intestinal Resection
Introduction Although Seprafilm ® has been demonstrated to reduce adhesion formation , it is not known whether its usage would translate into a reduction in adhesive small-bowel obstruction . Methods This was a prospect i ve , r and omized , multicenter , multinational , single-blind , controlled study . This report focuses on those patients who underwent intestinal resection ( n = 1,701 ) . Before closure of the abdomen , patients were r and omized to receive Seprafilm ® or no treatment . Seprafilm ® was applied to adhesiogenic tissues throughout the abdomen . The incidence and type of bowel obstruction was compared between the two groups . Time to first adhesive small-bowel obstruction was compared during the course of the study by using survival analysis methods . The mean follow-up time for the occurrence of adhesive small-bowel obstruction was 3.5 years . Results There was no difference between the treatment and control group in overall rate of bowel obstruction . The incidence of adhesive small-bowel obstruction requiring reoperation was significantly lower for Seprafilm ® patients compared with no-treatment patients : 1.8 vs. 3.4 percent ( P < 0.05 ) . This finding represents an absolute reduction in adhesive small-bowel obstruction requiring reoperation of 1.6 percent and a relative reduction of 47 percent . In addition , a stepwise multivariate analysis indicated that the use of Seprafilm ® was the only predictive factor for reducing adhesive small-bowel obstruction requiring reoperation . In both groups , 50 percent of first adhesive small-bowel obstruction episodes occurred within 6 months after the initial surgery with nearly 30 percent occurring within the first 30 days . Additionally no first adhesive small-bowel obstruction events were reported in Years 4 and 5 of follow-up . Conclusions The overall bowel obstruction rate was unchanged ; however , adhesive small-bowel obstruction requiring reoperation was significantly reduced by the use of Seprafilm ® , which was the only factor that predicted this outcome
None of the techniques that were compared significantly reduced the incidence of adhesive small bowel obstruction .
None of the specific techniques that were compared reduced the two main adhesion-related clinical outcomes , small bowel obstruction and infertility .
The meta- analysis provides little evidence for the surgical principle that using less invasive techniques , introducing less foreign bodies or causing less ischaemia reduces the extent and severity of adhesions
INTRODUCTION Adhesion formation is the most common complication following  peritoneal surgery  and the leading cause of small bowel obstruction , acquired infertility and inadvertent organ injury at reoperation .
Using a ' good surgical technique ' is advocated as a first step in preventing adhesions .
However , the evidence for different surgical techniques to reduce adhesion formation needs confirmation .