Effect of photodynamic therapy on normal fibroblasts and colon anastomotic healing in mice.

Photodynamic therapy as an adjuvant modality to surgical resection of colon cancer is feasible provided that it does not affect healing of the anastomosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of photodynamic therapy on the viability of normal fibroblasts and on the healing process of colonic anastomosis in mice. Both in vitro and in vivo methods were employed. For in vitro study, 2 x 10(to the fifth power); human fibroblasts were incubated in triplicate with 5-aminolevulinic acid (2.5 microg/well) for 48 hours. Cells then underwent photoradiation at light doses of 50, 100, and 200 joules/cm(2) using a nonlaser light source. Viability was assessed by methylene blue dye exclusion. For in vivo studies, 60 mice were randomized into study and control groups and underwent laparotomy involving colonic anastomosis. The anastomosis underwent photodynamic therapy using 5-aminolevulinic acid (60 mg/kg) as a photosensitizer and a nonlaser light (40 joules/cm(2)). On postoperative days 1, 4, 7, 14, and 21, six mice were killed and subjected to bursting pressure and histologic examinations. Results of in vitro study showed pretreatment cell viability to be 96% to 99% in both groups. Photodynamic therapy caused no significant change in fibroblast viability at all light doses. Results of in vivo studies showed that the mean bursting pressure of both groups dropped to a low peak on day 4. Subsequently there was a gradual increase in bursting pressure along the examined time points (P <0. 001). There was no difference in bursting pressure between the two groups for all time points examined. It was concluded that photodynamic therapy has no effect on viability of normal human fibroblasts and no adverse effects on healing of colonic anastomosis.

Model of implantation of tumor cells simulating recurrence in colonic anastomosis in mice.

PURPOSE: Local recurrence after colorectal cancer surgery is usually perianastomotic. An experiment was designed to investigate whether free intraluminal cells can penetrate through a colonic anastomosis and thereby cause local recurrence. METHODS: BALB/c and C57/BL mice underwent ascending colotomy followed by watertight anastomosis. Thereafter, CT-26 murine colon carcinoma cells were injected into the cecal lumen 2 cm proximal to the anastomosis of syngeneic BALB/c mice, whereas B-16 murine melanoma cells were injected in the same fashion into C57/BL mice. Control animals without anastomosis received similar injections. Animals were killed 24 hours, 72 hours, and 30 days after surgery and were checked for tumorigenesis. RESULTS: Results of peritoneal fluid cytology were negative after 24 hours, whereas after 72 hours cancer cells were identified in the peritoneal fluid of 80 percent of mice with colotomy and anastomosis compared with 20 percent of control mice. Thirty days after surgery, 11.1 percent of the control BALB/c mice developed pericecal tumor growth, similar to the overall rate of murine melanoma in C57/BL. In mice with anastomoses, perianastomotic tumor growth was observed in 47.5 percent of BALB/c mice (P < 0.001) and was correlated with the number of injected cells. Tumor growth reached approximately 75 percent tumor take with high cell densities, whereas in C57/BL mice no difference was found between the experimental and control groups. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that free intraluminal cancer cells of colonic origin may penetrate through watertight anastomoses and implant on the anastomotic or peritoneal surface and initiate tumor growth. This anastomotic penetration is cell-mass dependent. The reported experimental model is simple, reproducible, and advantageous for studies of colonic anastomosis.

[Restorative proctocolectomy for ulcerative colitis and familial polyposis].

From 1987-1994 we performed 35 proctocolectomies with ileal pouch anal anastomosis. The indication for operation was ulcerative colitis in 29 and familial polyposis in 6. The mean ages at operation were 35 and 25 years, respectively. The most common postoperative complication was small bowel obstruction in 25% of the patients, requiring re-operation in half of them. The incidence of this complication may be reduced by operating in only 1 stage when possible, without creating a protective ileostomy. The second serious complication was pouchitis, in 17%, which was controlled by antibiotics. There has been no mortality. All patients, except for 2 with an S-shaped pouch, evacuate spontaneously a mean of 5 bowel movements a day. Continence was mildly impaired (usually night-staining of a pad) in 30% of patients in whom the pouch-anal anastomosis was performed after stripping the mucosa of the rectal remnant. In those in whom the pouch-anal anastomosis was performed by means of the double stapling technique, continence was almost completely preserved. We therefore recommend that proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis be performed in 1 stage when possible, using the double stapling technique. Staged operation should be reserved for severely ill patients, or when stripping of the rectal mucosa is performed for familial polyposis and ulcerative colitis with severe dysplasia.