Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Case Reports in Surgery
Volume 2018 (2018), Article ID 9628742, 6 pages
Case Report

Effect of 4DryField® PH, a Novel Adhesion Barrier, on Recurrence of Intestinal Adhesions after Extensive Visceral Adhesiolysis

Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Evangelisches Krankenhaus Unna, Holbeinstr. 10, 59423 Unna, Germany

Correspondence should be addressed to Gerhard Blumhardt; ed.enilno-t@tdrahmulb

Received 15 December 2017; Accepted 28 January 2018; Published 11 March 2018

Academic Editor: Boris Kirshtein

Copyright © 2018 Gerhard Blumhardt et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


Background. Adhesions occur after up to 97% of abdominal interventions causing chronic pain, infertility, and intestinal obstruction. Various concepts to prevent adhesions have been presented but mostly either have low efficacy or are not applicable in resective intestinal surgery or incomplete hemostasis. In this retrospective one-center clinical trial, the course of patients with extensive abdominal adhesiolysis and application of a recent starch-based formulation, 4DryField PH (4DF), is analyzed. Case Report. Five female patients (age 65–83 years) underwent extensive open adhesiolysis with application of 4DF gel for adhesion prevention, premixed extracorporeally with saline or Ringer’s solution (60–70 mL per 5 g 4DF) for homogeneous gel distribution on intestinal loops and in the peritoneal cavity. In addition, dry 4DF powder was dispersed on the greater omentum and subsequently transformed into a gel by dripping with saline or Ringer’s solution directly before abdominal closure. Patients were followed up for more than two years, except for one patient who died after nine months due to metastases. One patient with complex situation due to Gore-Tex mesh in the lower abdomen showed no adhesions at scheduled second-look operation but after six months had relaparotomy for adhesiolysis. All other patients have remained free of adhesions or adhesion-related symptoms during follow-up. Conclusion. Considering the extent and complexity of adhesions, treatment with 4DF gel for adhesion prevention after open adhesiolysis appears promising. Prospective randomized trials should further elaborate on this clinical concept.