ArticlePloS one2025
The effect of Tannic acid on colonic anastomosis in abdominal sepsis: An experimental study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the effect of tannic acid on colonic anastomosis in a sepsis model induced by cecal abrasion. MATERIALS AND
methodsThirty Sprague-Dawley rats were used. The animals were randomly divided into three groups of ten: Group 1 (n:10): Colonic anastomosis + 0.9% isotonic NaCl. Group 2 (n:10): Cecal ligation and puncture + Colonic anastomosis + 0.9% isotonic NaCl. Group 3 (n:10): Cecal ligation and puncture + Colonic anastomosis + Tannic Acid group. The rats were sacrificed on the fifth postoperative day, and the resected colon segments, bursting pressure, hydroxyproline levels, and histopathologic features of the anastomosis were evaluated.
resultsThe bursting pressure value was statistically significantly higher in Group 3, where tannic acid was administered (p < 0.05). Group 2 and Group 3, in which peritonitis was induced, had moderate levels of fibroblastic activity, inflammatory cell infiltration, neovascularisation, and collagen; whereas, they were higher in Group 1. Although the inflammation value dropped in Group 3 compared to Groups 1 and 2, there was no statistical difference in Group 2. The hydroxyproline values were 2.046 ± 1.1411 mcg/gr and 5.9730 ± 4.35900 mcg/gr tissues, respectively, in Groups 2 and 3, where septic conditions prevailed, and a statistically significant difference was found (p < 0.05).
conclusionThis experimental study revealed that the use of tannic acid during anastomosis has a positive effect on wound healing, acting through higher colonic anastomotic bursting pressures and higher tissue hydroxyproline levels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.