Efficacy of Ozone Therapy Against the Formation of Peritoneal Adhesion in Rat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Peritoneal adhesion (PA) is a consequence of wound healing that sometimes causes severe postoperative complications. Despite all the preventive measures and agents, PA has still not been eliminated completely. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of the medical ozone therapy (MOT) on the development of postoperative peritoneal and uterine tube adhesions. MATERIAL AND METHOD Twenty one female Wistar‐Albino type rats were used in this study. The rats were randomly divided into three groups of sham‐operated, PA and PA+MOT. After performing a lower midline abdominal incision, a standard uterine lesion was created by electrocauterization in the PA and PA+MOT groups. The PA+MOT group received 0.7 mg/kg per day ozone/oxygen mixture intraperitoneally for a total of 3 days. At the 7th day, peritoneal washing fluids of rats were obtained for TNF‐alpha evaluation. Then all of the rats were killed, and uterine adhesions were staged according to the Leach scoring system. Uterine tissue samples were harvested for biochemical and histopathological evaluation. RESULTS In the PA+MOT group, the total adhesion score, oxidative stress markers including malondialdehyde, superoxide dismutase and glutathione peroxides were significantly lower than the PA group (P < 0.05). In addition, TNF‐alpha levels of peritoneal washing fluid were found decreased in the PA+MOT group than the PA group. CONCLUSION Medical Ozone Therapy significantly reduces the prevalence of peritoneal and uterine tube adhesion formation in rats by possible decreasing oxidative stress.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".