Aim: To summarize the most common etiologic factors and describe the pathophysiology in the formation of peritoneal adhesions, to outline their clinical significance and consequences, and to evaluate the pharmacologic, mechanical, and surgical adjuvant strategies to minimize peritoneal adhesion formation. Methods: We performed an extensive MEDLINE search of the internationally published English literature of all medical and epidemiological journal articles, textbooks, scientific reports, and scientific journals from 1940 to 1997. We also reviewed reference lists in all the articles retrieved in the search as well as those of major texts regarding intraperitoneal postsurgical adhesion formation. All sources identified were reviewed with particular attention to risk factors, pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, various methods, and innovative techniques for effectively and safely reducing the formation of postsurgical adhesions. Results: The formation of postoperative peritoneal adhesions is an important complication following gynecological and general abdominal surgery, leading to clinical and significant economical consequences. Adhesion occur in more than 90% of the patients following major abdominal surgery and in 55–100% of the women undergoing pelvic surgery. Small-bowel obstruction, infertility, chronic abdominal and pelvic pain, and difficult reoperative surgery are the most common consequences of peritoneal adhesions. Despite elaborate efforts to develop effective strategies to reduce or prevent adhesions, their formation remains a frequent occurrence after abdominal surgery. Conclusions: Until additional information and findings from future clinical investigations exist, only a meticulous surgical technique can be advocated in order to reduce unnecessary morbidity and mortality rates from these untoward effects of surgery.

Keywords:
Adhesions, pathophysiology, Pelvic surgery, Prevention/treatment, adhesions
1.
Menzies D, Ellis H: Intestinal obstruction from adhesions: How big is the problem? Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1990;72:60–63.
2.
Weibel MA, Manjo G: Peritoneal adhesions and their relation to abdominal surgery. Am J Surg 1973;126:345–353.
3.
Operative Laparoscopy Study Group: Postoperative adhesion development after operative laparoscopy: Evaluation at early second-look procedures. Fertil Steril 1991;55:700–704.
4.
Ellis H: The causes and prevention of intestinal adhesions. Br J Surg 1982;69:241–243.
5.
di Zerega GS: Contemporary adhesion prevention. Fertil Steril 1994;61:219–235.
6.
Menzies D: Peritoneal adhesions: Incidence, cause, and prevention. Surg Annu Surg 1992;24:27–45.
7.
Badawy SZ, Iskander S: Omental reaction in cases of uterine perforation by the IUCD. Contraception 1974;10:73–77.
8.
Luijendijk RW, de Lange DCD, Wauters CCAP, et al: Foreign material in postoperative adhesions. Ann Surg 1996;223:242–248.
9.
Eubanks S, Schauer PR: Laparoscopic surgery; in Sabiston DC, Lyerly HK (eds): Textbook of Surgery: The Biological Basis of Modern Surgical Practice, ed 15. Philadelphia, Saunders, 1997, pp 801–807.
10.
Drollette CM, Badawy SZA: Pathophysiology of pelvic adhesions: Modern trends in preventing infertility. J Reprod Med 1992;37:107–122.
11.
Menzies D: Post-operative adhesions: Their treatment and relevance in clinical practice. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1993;75:147–153.
12.
Suslavich FJ, Turner NA, King PS, et al: Intra-abdominal adhesions: Intraoperative US. Radiology 1989;172:387–389.
13.
Monk BJ, Berman ML, Montz FJ: Adhesions after extensive gynecologic surgery: Clinical significance, etiology and prevention. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994;170:1396–1403.
14.
Luciano AA: Prevention of postoperative adhesions; in Nezhat CR, Berger GS, Nezhat FR, et al. (eds): Endometriosis: Advanced Management and Surgical Techniques. New York, Springer, 1995, pp 193–199.
15.
Scovill W: Small bowel obstruction; in Cameron JL (ed): Current Therapy in Surgery. St. Louis, Mosby, 1995, pp 100–104.
16.
Soybel DI: Ileus and bowel obstruction; in Greenfield LJ (ed): Surgery: Scientific Principles and Practice. Philadelphia, Lippincott-Raven, 1997, pp 817–831.
17.
Ellis H: The clinical significance of adhesions: Focus on intestinal obstruction. Eur J Surg Suppl 1997;577:5–9.
18.
Stricker B, Blanco J, Fox HE: The gynecologic contribution to intestinal obstruction in females. J Am Coll Surg 1994;178:617–620.
19.
Wilkins BM, Spitz L: Incidence of postoperative adhesion obstruction following neonatal laparotomy. Br J Surg 1986;73:762–764.
20.
Ottinger WL: Small bowel obstruction; in Morris PJ, Malt RA (eds): Oxford Textbook of Surgery. New York, Oxford University Press, 1994, pp 961–965.
21.
De Cherney AH, di Zerega GS: Clinical problem of intraperitoneal postsurgical adhesion formation following general surgery and the use of adhesion prevention barriers. Surg Clin North Am 1997;77:671–688.
22.
Barkan H, Webster S, Ozeran S: Factors predicting the recurrence of adhesive small-bowel obstruction. Am J Surg 1995;170:361–365.
23.
Levrant SG, Bieber EJ, Barnes RB: Anterior abdominal wall adhesions after laparotomy or laparoscopy. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 1997;4:353–356.
24.
Tulandi T, Murray C, Guralnick M: Adhesion formation and reproductive outcome after myomectomy and second-look laparoscopy. Obstet Gynecol 1993;82:213–215.
25.
Krebs HB, Goplerud DR: Mechanical intestinal obstruction in patients with gynecologic disease: A review of 368 patients. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1987;157:577–583.
26.
Tunca JC, Buchler DA, Mack EA, et al: The management of ovarian-cancer-caused bowel obstruction. Gynecol Oncol 1981;12:186–192.
27.
Monk BJ, Solh S, Schuricht LC, et al: Adhesion-related complications of radical hysterectomy (abstract). Proc 24th Annu Meet of the Felix Rutledge Society, Laguna Beach, June, 1993.
28.
Lifshitz S, Johnson R, Roberts JA, et al: Intestinal fistula and obstruction following pelvic exenteration. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1981;152:630–632.
29.
Orr JW, Shingleton HM, Hatch KD, et al: Gastrointestinal complications associated with pelvic exenteration. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1983;145:325–332.
30.
Markman M, Jones W, Lewis JL Jr, et al: Impact of laparotomy finding of significant intra-abdominal adhesions on the surgically defined complete response rate to subsequent salvage intraperitoneal chemotherapy. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 1992;118:163–165.
31.
di Zerega GS: Biochemical events in peritoneal tissue repair. Eur J Surg Suppl 1997;577:10–16.
32.
Mahadevan MM, Wiseman D, Leader A, et al: The effects of ovarian adhesive disease upon follicular development in cycles of controlled stimulation for in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1985;44:489–492.
33.
Molloy D, Martin M, Speirs A, et al: Performance of patients with a ‘frozen pelvis’ in an in vitro fertilization program. Fertil Steril 1987;47:450–455.
34.
Mecke H, Semm K, Freys I, et al: Incidence of adhesions in the pelvis after pelviscopic operative treatment of tubal pregnancy. Gynecol Obstet Invest 1985;28:202–204.
35.
Duffy DM, di Zerega GS: Adhesion controversies: Pelvic pain as a cause of adhesions, crystalloids in preventing them. J Reprod Med 1996;41:19–26.
36.
Kresch AJ, Seifer DB, Sachs LB, et al: Laparoscopy in 100 women with chronic pelvic pain. Obstet Gynecol 1984;64:672–674.
37.
Punch MR, Roth RS: Adhesions and chronic pain: An overview of pain and a discussion of adhesions and pelvic pain. Prog Clin Biol Res 1993;381:101–120.
38.
Luciano AA, Maier DB, Koch EI, et al: A comparative study of postoperative adhesions following laser surgery by laparoscopy versus laparotomy in the rabbit model. Obstet Gynecol 1989;74:220–224.
39.
Diamond MP, Daniell JF, Feste J, et al: Adhesion reformation and de novo adhesion formation following reproductive pelvic surgery. Fertil Steril 1987;47:864–866.
40.
Nezhat CR, Nezhat FR, Metzger DA, et al: Adhesion reformation after reproductive surgery by videolaseroscopy. Fertil Steril 1990;53:1008–1011.
41.
Lundorff P, Hahlin M, Kallfelt B, et al: Adhesion formation after laparoscopic surgery in tubal pregnancy: A randomized trial versus laparotomy. Fertil Steril 1991;55:911–915.
42.
Nezhat CR, Nezhat FR, Silfen SL, et al: Laparoscopic myomectomy. Int J Fertil 1991;36:275–280.
43.
Hasson HM, Rotman C, Rana N, et al: Laparoscopic myomectomy. Obstet Gynecol 1992;80:884–888.
44.
di Zerega GS: The peritoneum: Postsurgical repair and adhesion formation; in Rock JA, Murphy AA, Jones HW (eds): Female Reproductive Surgery. Baltimore, Williams & Wilkins, 1992, pp 2–18.
45.
Rodgers KE, di Zerega GS: Function of peritoneal exudate cells after abdominal surgery. J Invest Surg 1993;6:9–23.
46.
Holmdahl L: The role of fibrinolysis in adhesion formation. Eur J Surg Suppl 1997;577:24–31.
47.
Raftery AT: Effect of peritoneal trauma on peritoneal fibrinolytic activity and intraperitonal adhesion formation. An experimental study in the rat. Eur Surg Res 1981;13:397–401.
48.
Ryan G, Grobety J, Majino G: Postoperative peritoneal adhesions: A study of mechanisms. Am J Pathol 1971;65:117–148.
49.
Buckman R Jr, Buckman P, Hufnagel H, et al: A physiologic basis for the adhesion free healing of deperitonealized surfaces. J Surg Res 1976;21:67–76.
50.
Peritoneal adhesiolysis; in: National Inpatient Profile 1993. Baltimore, HCIA, 1994, vol 427, pp 653–655.
51.
Ray NF, Larsen JW, Stillman RJ, et al: Economic impact of hospitalizations for lower abdominal adhesiolysis in the United States in 1988. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1993;176:271–276.
52.
Montz FJ, Shimanuki T, di Zerega GS: Postsurgical mesothelial remesothelialization; in de Cherney AH, Polan ML (eds): Reproductive Surgery: Chicago, Year Book, Medical Publishers, 1986, pp 31–47.
53.
Risberg BO: Adhesions: Preventive strategies. Eur J Surg Suppl 1997;577:32–39.
54.
Beck DE: The role of Seprafilm® bioresorbable membrane in adhesion prevention. Eur J Surg Suppl 1997;577:49–55.
55.
Rock JA: Infertility: Surgical aspects; in Yen SSC, Jaffe RB (eds): Reproductive Endocrinology, Physiology, Pathophysiology and Clinical Management. Philadelphia, Saunders, 1991, pp 710–714.
56.
Duffy DM, di Zerega GS: Is peritoneal closure necessary? Obstet Gynecol Surv 1994;49:817–822.
57.
Gomel V, Urman B, Gurgan T: Pathophysiology of adhesion formation and strategies for prevention. J Reprod Med 1996;41:35–41.
58.
O’Leary DP, Coakley JB: The influence of suturing and sepsis on the development of post-operative peritoneal adhesions. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1992;74:134–137.
59.
Griffin A, Malinak L: Peritoneal closure. Prog Clin Biol Res 1993;381:97–100.
60.
Nygaard IE, Squatrito RC: Abdominal incisions from creation to closure. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1996;51:429–436.
61.
Malinak LR, Young AE: Peritoneal closure: When and why. Contemp Obstet Gynecol 1997;42:102–112.
62.
Diamond MP, De Cherney AH: Pathogenesis of adhesion formation/reformation: Application to reproductive pelvic surgery. Microsurgery 1987;8:103–107.
63.
Frankfurter D, De Cherney AH: Pelvic adhesive disease. Postgrade Obstet Gynecol 1996;16:1–5.
64.
Gutmann JN, Diamond MP: Principles of laparoscopic microsurgery and adhesion prevention; in Azziz R, Murphy AA (eds): Practical Manual of Operative Laparoscopy and Hysteroscopy. New York, Springer, 1992, pp 55–64.
65.
Gutmann JN, Penzias AS, Diamond MP: Adhesions in reproductive surgery; in Wallach EE, Zaccur HA (eds): Reproductive Medicine and Surgery. St. Louis, Mosby, 1995, pp 681–693.
66.
Wiseman D: Polymers for the prevention of surgical adhesions; in Domb AJ (ed): Polymeric Site-Specific Pharmacotherapy. New York, Wiley, 1994, pp 370–421.
67.
Tulandi T: Adhesion prevention in laparoscopic surgery. Int J Fertil Menopausal Stud 1996;41:452–457.
68.
Montz FJ, Fowler JM, Wolff AJ, et al: The ability of recombinant plasminogen activator to inhibit post-radial pelvic surgery adhesion in the dog model. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1991;43:141–145.
69.
Thompson JN, Paterson-Brown S, Harbourne T, et al: Reduced human peritoneal plasminogen activating activity: Possible mechanism of adhesion formation. Br J Surg 1989;76:382–384.
70.
Doody KJ, Dunn RC, Buttram VC Jr: Recombinant tissue plasminogen activator reduces adhesion formation in a rabbit uterine horn model. Fertil Steril 1989;51:509–512.
71.
Shear L, Swartz C, Shinaberger J, et al: Kinetics of peritoneal fluid absorption in adult man. N Engl J Med 1965;272:123–127.
72.
Fayez JA, Schneider PJ: Prevention of pelvic adhesion formation by different modalities of treatment. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1987;57:1184–1188.
73.
di Zerega GS, Campeau JD: Use of instillates to prevent intraperitoneal adhesions: Crystalloid and dextran. Infertil Reprod Med Clin North Am 1994;5:463–478.
74.
Sahakian V, Rodgers R, Halme J, et al: Effects of carbon dioxide saturated normal saline and Ringer’s lactate on postsurgical adhesion formation in the rabbit. Obstet Gynecol 1993;82:851–853.
75.
Pagidas K, Tulandi T: Effects of Ringer’s lactate, Interceed (TC7) and Gore-Tex Surgical Membrane on postsurgical adhesion formation. Fertil Steril 1992;57:199–201.
76.
Tulandi T: Intraperitoneal instillates. Infertil Reprod Med Clin North Am 1994;5:479–483.
77.
Urman B, Gomel V, Jetha N: Effect of hyaluronic acid on postoperative intraperitoneal adhesion formation in the rat model. Fertil Steril 1991;56:563–567.
78.
Burns JW, Skinner K, Colt J, et al: Prevention of tissue injury and postsurgical adhesions by precoating tissues with hyaluronic acid solutions. J Surg Res 1995;59:644–652.
79.
Diamond MP for the Sepracoat® Adhesion Study Group: Precoating with Sepracoat (HAL-C)® reduces post-operative de novo adhesion formation in a multicenter randomized placebo-controlled gynecologic clinical trial (abstract). Soc Gynecol Invest, Philadelphia, 1996.
80.
Wallwiener D, Meyer A, Bastert G: Adhesion formation of the parietal and visceral peritoneum: An explanation for the controversy on the use of autologous and alloplastic barriers? Fertil Steril 1998;69:132–137.
81.
Badawy SZA, Baggish MS, El Bakry MM, et al: Evaluation of tissue healing and adhesion formation after an intra-abdominal amniotic membrane graft in the rat. J Reprod Med 1989;34:198–202.
82.
Ten Berge BS, Lok TT: Plastic surgery of closed tubes with chorion amnion. Fertil Steril 1954;5:339–352.
83.
Trelford JD, Trelford-Sauder M: The amnion in surgery: Past and present. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1979;134:833–845.
84.
Pudenz RH, Odum GL: Meningocerebral adhesions: An experimental study of the effect of human amniotic membrane, amnioplastin, beef allantoic membrane, cargile membrane, tantalum foil, polyvinyl alcohol films. Surgery 1942;12:318–344.
85.
Chao YC, Humphreys S, Penfield W: A new method of preventing adhesions: The use of amnioplastin after craniotomy. Br Med J 1940;i:517–519.
86.
Massee JS, Symmonds RE, Dockery MB, et al: Use of fetal membranes as a replacement for pelvic peritoneum after pelvic exenteration in the dog. Surg Forum 1962;13:407–408.
87.
Trelford-Sauder M, Trelford JD, Matolo NM: Replacement of the peritoneum with amnion following pelvic exenteration. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1977;145:699–701.
88.
Trelford-Sauder M, Dawe EJ, Trelford JD: Use of allograft amniotic membrane for control of intra-abdominal adhesions. J Med 1978;9:273–284.
89.
Abitbol JJ, Lincoln TL, Lind BI, et al: Preventing postlaminectomy adhesion: A new experimental model. Spine 1994;19:1809–1814.
90.
Pacholewicz JK, Daloisio C, Shawarby OA, et al: Efficacy of autologous peritoneum as a biological membrane in cardiac surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1994;8:563–565.
91.
Young RL, Cota J, Zund G, et al: The use of an amniotic membrane graft to prevent postoperative adhesions. Fertil Steril 1991;55:624–628.
92.
Young RL, Zurawin RK, Fine PM, et al: The use of amniotic membrane to prevent parietal peritoneal adhesions in a rabbit model. J Gynecol Tech 1998;4:9–12.
93.
Hiraizumi Y, Transfeldt EE, Fujimaki E, et al: Application of polyvinyl alcohol hydrogel membrane as anti-adhesive interposition after spinal surgery. Spine 1997;22:1418–1419.
94.
Larsson B: Efficacy of Interceed in adhesion prevention in gynecologic surgery: A review of 13 clinical studies. J Reprod Med 1996;41:27–34.
95.
Interceed (TC7) Adhesions Barrier Study Group: Prevention of postsurgical adhesions by Interceed (TC7), an absorbable adhesion barrier: A prospective, randomized multicenter clinical study. Fertil Steril 1989;51:933–938.
96.
Diamond MP, Linsky CB, Cunningham T, et al: A model for sidewall adhesions in the rabbit: Reduction by an absorbable barrier. Microsurgery 1987;8:197–200.
97.
Goldberg JM, Toledo AA, Mitchel DE: An evaluation of the Gore-Tex surgical membrane for the prevention of post-operative peritoneal adhesions. Obstet Gynecol 1987;70:846–848.
98.
Galan N, Leader A, Malkinson T, et al: Adhesion prophylaxis in rabbits with Surgicel and two absorbable microsurgical sutures. J Reprod Med 1983;28:662–664.
99.
Hixson C, Swanson LA, Friedman CI: Oxidized cellulose for preventing adnexal adhesions. J Reprod Med 1986;31:58–60.
100.
Larsson B, Nisell H, Granberg I: An absorbable hemostatic material in prevention of peritoneal adhesions in rats. Acta Chir Scand 1978;144:375–378.
101.
The Surgical Membrane Study Group: Prophylaxis of pelvic sidewall adhesions with Gore-Tex surgical membrane: A multicenter clinical investigation. Fertil Steril 1992;57:921–923.
102.
Becker JM, Dayton MT, Faxio VW, et al: Prevention of post-operative abdominal adhesions by a sodium hyaluronate-based bioresorbable membrane. A prospective, randomized, double-blind multicenter study. J Am Coll Surg 1996;183:297–306.
103.
Soules MR, Dennis L, Bosarge A, et al: The prevention of postoperative pelvic adhesions: An animal study comparing barrier methods with dextran 70. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1982;143:829–834.
104.
Haney AF, Doty ED: Murine peritoneal injury and de novo adhesion formation caused by oxidized-regenerated cellulose (Interceed TC7) but not expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (Gore-Tex surgical membrane). Fertil Steril 1992;57:202–208.
105.
Haney AF: Removal of surgical barriers of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene at second-look laparoscopy was not associated with adhesion formation. Fertil Steril 1997;68:721–723.
106.
Revuelta JM, Garcia-Rinaldi R, Val F: Expanded PTFE surgical membrane for pericardial closure. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1985;89:451–455.
107.
Diamond MP, Linsky CB, Cunningham T, et al: Synergistic effects of Interceed (TC7) and heparin in reducing adhesion formation in the rabbit uterine horn model. Fertil Steril 1991;55:389–394.
108.
Linsky CB, Diamond MP, di Zerega GS, et al: Effect of blood on the efficacy of barrier adhesion reduction in the rabbit uterine hom model. Infertility 1988;11:273–280.
109.
Li TC, Cooke ID: The value of an absorbable adhesion barrier, Interceed®, in the prevention of adhesion reformation following microsurgical adhesiolysis. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1994;101:335–339.
110.
Reid RL, Hahn PM, Spence JE, et al: A randomized clinical trial of oxidized regenerated cellulose adhesion barrier (Interceed, TC7) alone or in combination with heparin. Fertil Steril 1997;67:23–29.
111.
Diamond MP, Wiseman DM, Linsky C: Interceed (TC7) absorbable adhesion barrier. Infertil Reprod Med Clin North Am 1994;5:485–508.
112.
Hickey MJ, di Zerega GS: Recent advances in adhesion prevention. Contemp Obstet Gynecol 1990;35:14–26.
113.
Diamond MP: Reduction of adhesions after uterine myomectomy by Seprafilm membrane (HAL-F): A blinded, prospective, randomized, multicenter clinical study. Fertil Steril 1996;66:904–910.
114.
Albrechtsen OK: The fibrinolytic activity of human tissues. Br J Haematol 1957;3:284–291.
115.
Albrechtsen OK: The fibrinolytic activity of animal tissues. Acta Physiol Scand 1957;39:284–290.
116.
Holmdahl L: Fibrinolysis and Adhesions; thesis University of Göteborg, 1994, pp 57–58.
117.
Kaidi AA, Gurchumelidze T, Nazzal M, et al: Tumor necrosis factor alpha: A marker for peritoneal adhesion formation. J Surg Res 1995;58:516–518.
118.
Hershlag A, Otterness IG, Bliven ML, et al: The effect of interleukin-1 on adhesion formation in the rat. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1991;165:771–774.
119.
Kaidi AA, Nazzal M, Gurchumelidze T, et al: Preoperative administration of antibodies against tumor necrosis factor-α and interleukin 1 and their impact on peritoneal adhesion formation. Am Surg 1995;61:568–572.
120.
Saba AA, Godziachvili V, Mavani AK, et al: Serum levels of interleukin 1 and tumor necrosis factor alpha correlate with peritoneal adhesion grades in humans after major abdominal surgery. Am Surg 1998;64:734–737.
121.
Ar’Rajab A, Snoj M, Larsson K, et al: Exogenous phospholipid reduces postoperative peritoneal adhesions in rats. Eur J Surg 1995;161:341–344.
122.
Snoj M, Ar’Rajab A, Ahren B, et al: Effect of phosphatidylcholine on postoperative adhesions after small bowel anastomosis in the rat. Br J Surg 1992;79:427–429.
123.
Snoj M, Ar’Rajab A, Ahren B, et al: Phospholipase-resistant phosphatidylcholine reduces intra-abdominal adhesions induced by bacterial peritonitis. Res Exp Med (Berl) 1993;193:117–122.
124.
Sigel B, Golub RM, Loiacono LA, et al: Technique of ultrasonic detection and mapping of abdominal wall adhesions. Surg Endosc 1991;5:161–165.
125.
Kodama I, Loiacono LA, Sigel B, et al: Ultrasonic detection of viscera slide as an indicator of abdominal wall adhesions. J Clin Ultrasound 1992;20:375–380.
126.
Kolecki RV, Golub RM, Sigel B, et al: Accuracy of viscera slide detection of abdominal wall adhesions by ultrasound. Surg Endosc 1994;8:871–874.
127.
Treutner KH, Bertram P, Schumpelick V: Experimental prevention of peritoneal adhesions in general surgery; in di Zerega GS, et al. (eds): Pelvic Surgery: Adhesion Formation and Prevention. New York, Springer, 1997, pp 66–73.
© 2001 S. Karger AG, Basel
2001
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.