PURPOSE: Postoperative intraabdominal adhesion formation is a major clinical problem. No previous study was found, reporting the relationship between adhesion formation and melatonin administration, but melatonin, a strong antioxidant, is recognized to have certain effects on the progression of adhesion formation mechanism. It was therefore decided to investigate the effects of melatonin on postoperative adhesion formation. MATERIALS AMD METHODS: A total number of 24 Spraque-Dawley rats were utilized. Three groups, described as: Group A, sham laparatomy (n=8), Group B, rats that underwent only ischemia-reperfusion (n=8) and Group C, rats that underwent ischemia- reperfusion and were given 10 mg/kg melatonin solution i.v. (n=8). For Groups B and C, the ileocolic vessels were clamped. Blood glutathione peroxidase levels of all study groups were assessed, then microscopic and macroscopic adhesion scores were evaluated. RESULTS: Glutathione peroxidase levels of the melatonin-treated group were significantly higher and fibroblast proliferation and macroscopic adhesion scores were significantly lower, than in the melatonin-free group. CONCLUSION: The results of this study supported the hypothesis, that melatonin administration may prevent intraabdominal adhesions resulting from surgery.
Abdomen/pathology/*surgery ; Animals ; Antioxidants/*therapeutic use ; Melatonin/*therapeutic use ; Postoperative Complications/*prevention & control ; Rats ; Rats, Sprague-Dawley ; Tissue Adhesions/drug therapy/pathology

PURPOSE: To compare the performance of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG PET/CT) with conventional imaging methods (CIM), including computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and mammography (MMG) in cancer of unknown primary (CUP).METHODS: A total of 36 patients with CUP, who referred to our clinic for a FDG PET/CTscan, were enrolled in this study. Thirty of the patients were also examined through either diagnostic CT/MRI and/or MMG. The diagnostic performance of both methods for the primary cancer location was analyzed. The results of FDG PET/CT and CIM were compared based on the standard reference of the histopathology and/or clinical and laboratory follow-up.RESULTS: The primary cancer locations were detected in 24 patients (66.6%, 24/36) by FDG PET/CT, whereas CIM identified the locations in 16 patients (53.3%, 16/30). Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy rates of the detection of the primary tumor localizations were as follows: 83, 70, 89, 58, and 79% for FDG PET/CT; 70, 62, 84, 42, and 68% for CIM, respectively. There was no statistical significance between modalities regarding any of the categories in 30 patients.CONCLUSION: FDG PET/CT detected the primary tumors of the patients with CUP more than CIM did. However, the difference between them was not found to be statistically significant. It may be considered that FDG PET/CT scan can be performed as a first-line tool in the initial diagnosis of the patients with CUP and to add radiodiagnostic imaging in selective cases.We conclude that if the first-line examination of a CUP patient has been already performed by a CIM and the result was negative or inconclusive, FDG PET/CT can be considered to avoid unnecessary imaging procedures.
Diagnosis ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Mammography ; Methods ; Positron-Emission Tomography ; Positron-Emission Tomography and Computed Tomography ; Sensitivity and Specificity

PURPOSE: To compare the performance of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG PET/CT) with conventional imaging methods (CIM), including computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and mammography (MMG) in cancer of unknown primary (CUP). METHODS: A total of 36 patients with CUP, who referred to our clinic for a FDG PET/CTscan, were enrolled in this study. Thirty of the patients were also examined through either diagnostic CT/MRI and/or MMG. The diagnostic performance of both methods for the primary cancer location was analyzed. The results of FDG PET/CT and CIM were compared based on the standard reference of the histopathology and/or clinical and laboratory follow-up. RESULTS: The primary cancer locations were detected in 24 patients (66.6%, 24/36) by FDG PET/CT, whereas CIM identified the locations in 16 patients (53.3%, 16/30). Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy rates of the detection of the primary tumor localizations were as follows: 83, 70, 89, 58, and 79% for FDG PET/CT; 70, 62, 84, 42, and 68% for CIM, respectively. There was no statistical significance between modalities regarding any of the categories in 30 patients. CONCLUSION FDG PET/CT detected the primary tumors of the patients with CUP more than CIM did. However, the difference between them was not found to be statistically significant. It may be considered that FDG PET/CT scan can be performed as a first-line tool in the initial diagnosis of the patients with CUP and to add radiodiagnostic imaging in selective cases.We conclude that if the first-line examination of a CUP patient has been already performed by a CIM and the result was negative or inconclusive, FDG PET/CT can be considered to avoid unnecessary imaging procedures.