Login Register Cart 0
Generic placeholder image

Current Women`s Health Reviews

Editor-in-Chief

ISSN (Print): 1573-4048
ISSN (Online): 1875-6581

Back
Journal Home About Journal Editorial Board Journal Insight Current Issue Volumes/Issues
Subscribe
Research Article

A Relook into Visceral Slide Test as a Preoperative Screening Modality to Detect Abdominal Wall Adhesions: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study

Author(s): Himanshi Jain, Roopa P. Shivananda*, Shubha Rao, Nivedita Hegde, Sangamithra Paladugu and Akhila Vasudeva

Volume 18, Issue 3, 2022

Published on: 05 August, 2021

Article ID: e031121195330 Pages: 6

DOI: 10.2174/1573404817666210805155219

Price: $65

Abstract

Background: Ultrasound has become an invaluable tool in our daily practice. Its role in screening for adhesions has been tested since the 1990s.

Objective: This study aims to determine the role of the visceral slide test as a screening method to predict abdominal wall adhesions in women undergoing gynecological surgery.

Methods: We conducted a prospective observational cohort study from August 2017 to July 2019 in women undergoing elective abdominopelvic surgery for a gynecological indication. Preoperatively, a visceral slide test was performed in 5 specified zones on the abdomen and the test results were clinically correlated with the presence, severity, and extent of adhesions intra-operatively.

Results: Results were reported as mean, standard deviation, range of values or number and percent. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic accuracy (including 95% confidence interval for all) of visceral slide test were calculated to determine intra- abdominal adhesions . We also found a correlation between the number of negative slide tests and PAI scores using Spearman’s correlation test. Of the 339 women who completed the study, 41.2% had a previous history of abdominopelvic surgery. In this study, the visceral slide test was found to have a sensitivity of 70.87% (95%CI 62.15-78.59), specificity of 86.32% (95% CI 80.95-90.64), Positive Predictive Value (PPV) of 75.63% (95% CI 68.49-81.59), negative predictive value (NPV) of 83.18%(95% CI 78.95-86.70) and diagnostic accuracy of 80.53%(95% CI 75.91-84.61)with p-value less than 0.001. The number of negative slide tests positively correlated with the Peritoneal Adhesion Index score (r = 0.662, p < 0.001) and also with increasing operative time and intraoperative blood loss. Accuracy and positive predictive value of the test were significantly higher in patients with a history of abdominal surgeries, endometriosis and PID.

Conclusion: Visceral slide test is an easy, rapid, non-invasive and reliable screening test to predict abdominal adhesions in women undergoing gynecological surgery. The presence of risk factors for adhesions increases the accuracy of the test.

Keywords: Transabdominal ultrasound, visceral slide test, abdominal wall adhesions, gynecologic surgery, accuracy, adhesions result.

Graphical Abstract

[1]
Capella-Monsonís H, Kearns S, Kelly J, Zeugolis DI. Battling adhesions: From understanding to prevention. BMC Biomed Eng 2019; 1(1): 5.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42490-019-0005-0] [PMID: 32903353]
[2]
Penzias A, Bendikson K, Falcone T, Gitlin S, et al. Postoperative adhesions in gynecologic surgery: A committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2019; 112(3): 458-63.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.06.027] [PMID: 31446904]
[3]
Incidence of adhesions after prior laparotomy- A laparoscopic appraisal. 1995.
[4]
Arung W, Meurisse M, Detry O. Pathophysiology and prevention of postoperative peritoneal adhesions. World J Gastroenterol 2011; 17(41): 4545-53.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v17.i41.4545] [PMID: 22147959]
[5]
Lower AM, Hawthorn RJS, Ellis H, O’Brien F, Buchan S, Crowe AM. The impact of adhesions on hospital readmissions over ten years after 8849 open gynaecological operations: An assessment from the Surgical and clinical adhesions research study. BJOG 2000; 107(7): 855-62.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2000.tb11083.x] [PMID: 10901556]
[6]
ten Broek RP, Issa Y, van Santbrink EJP, et al. Burden of adhesions in abdominal and pelvic surgery: Systematic review and met-analysis. BMJ 2013; 347(7929): f5588.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f5588] [PMID: 24092941]
[7]
H. van G. Consequences and complications of peritoneal adhesions. Color Dis 2007; 9: 25-34.(SUPPL. 2.) http://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&PAGE=reference&D=emed8&NEWS=N&AN=2007421558
[8]
Tabibian N, Swehli E, Boyd A, Umbreen A, Tabibian JH. Abdominal adhesions: A practical review of an often overlooked entity. Ann Med Surg (Lond) 2017; 15: 9-13.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2017.01.021] [PMID: 28203370]
[9]
Lee M, Kim HS, Chung HH, Kim JW, Park NH, Song YS. Prediction of intra-abdominal adhesions using the visceral slide test: A prospective observational study. Eur J obstet gynecol reprod biol 2017; 213(213): 22-5.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.04.011] [PMID: 28410537]
[10]
Kodama I, Loiacono LA, Sigel B, et al. Al. ultrasonic detection of viscera slide as an indicator of abdominal wall adhesions. J Clin Ultrasound 1992; 20(6): 375-80.
[11]
Parker MC, Wilson MS, Menzies D, et al. The SCAR-3 study: 5-year adhesion-related readmission risk following lower abdominal surgical procedures. Colorectal Dis 2005; 7(6): 551-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-1318.2005.00857.x] [PMID: 16232234]
[12]
Lang RA, Buhmann S, Hopman A, et al. Cine-MRI detection of intraabdominal adhesions: Correlation with intraoperative findings in 89 consecutive cases. Surg Endosc 2008; 22(11): 2455-61.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-9763-9] [PMID: 18322749]
[13]
Randall D, Fenner J, Gillott R, et al. A novel diagnostic aid for detection of intra-abdominal adhesions to the anterior abdominal wall using dynamic magnetic resonance imaging. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2016; 2016: 6.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/2523768]
[14]
Piccolboni D, Ciccone F, Settembre A. High resolution ultrasound for pre-operative detection of intraperitoneal adhesions: An invaluable diagnostic tool for the general and laparoscopic surgeon. J Ultrasound 2009; 12(4): 148-50.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jus.2009.09.001] [PMID: 23396872]
[15]
Minaker S, MacPherson C, Hayashi A. Can general surgeons evaluate visceral slide with transabdominal ultrasound to predict safe sites for primary laparoscopic port placement? A prospective study of sonographically naïve operators at a tertiary center. Am J Surg 2015; 209(5): 804-808, 808-809.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2014.12.020] [PMID: 25769880]
[16]
Kothari SN, Fundell LJ, Lambert PJ, Mathiason MA. Use of transabdominal ultrasound to identify intraabdominal adhesions prior to laparoscopy: A prospective blinded study. Am J Surg 2006; 192(6): 843-7.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2006.08.055] [PMID: 17161105]
[17]
Frappell J.. Laparoscopic entry after previous surgery. Obstet Gynaecol 2012; 14: 207-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-4667.2012.00119.x]
[18]
Dehbashi Z, Khazali S, Tanha FD, Mottahedian F, Ghajarzadeh M. Effectiveness of ovarian suspension in preventing postoperative ovarian adhesions in patients with severe pelvic endometriosis - A case-control study. Gynecol Surg 2019; 16: 10.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s10397-019-1063-y]
[19]
Pelvic inflammatory disease (PID). Statpearls - NCBI bookshelf https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK499959/
[20]
Yildirim IS, Yildirim D, Yesiralioglu S, Ozyurek SE. The visceral slide test for the prediction of abdominal wall adhesions: A prospective cohort study. East J Med 2019; 24(1): 91-5.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.5505/ejm.2019.34966]
[21]
Tu FF, Lamvu GM, Hartmann KE, Steege JF. Preoperative ultrasound to predict infraumbilical adhesions: A study of diagnostic accuracy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 192(1): 74-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2004.07.034] [PMID: 15672006]
[22]
Nezhat C, Cho J, Morozov V, Yeung P Jr. Preoperative periumbilical ultrasound-guided saline infusion (PUGSI) as a tool in predicting obliterating subumbilical adhesions in laparoscopy. Fertil Steril 2009; 91(6): 2714-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.03.073] [PMID: 18565517]
[23]
Sethi P, Choudhary D, Bhatia P, Bihani P. Perioperative steroid supplementation: Controversies continues!! Saudi J Anaesth 2017; 11(2): 249-50.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1658-354X.203055] [PMID: 28442977]

Rights & Permissions Print Cite
Article Metrics
9
© 2024 Bentham Science Publishers | Privacy Policy