Pathological and Diagnostic Assessment of Duodenal Wound Healing: A Comparative Experimental Study of Jejunal Serosal...

Background and Objectives: The treatment of duodenal injuries remains one of the most challenging issues in clinical surgery due to their high morbidity and mortality rates. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the histopathology and other diagnostic outcomes of wound repair following surgical reconstruction of large experimental duodenal defects using synthetic (ePTFE, expanded polytetrafluoroethylene) or organic (JSP, jejunal serosal patch) materials. Materials and Methods: A total of 20 European rabbits were randomly divided into two equal groups (n = 10 each). A grade III defect covering over 50% of the duodenum's circumference was created in the second part of the duodenum of the rabbits. The anesthesia, duodenal injury, postoperative care, and animal sacrifice protocols were identical for all experimental rabbits. The effectiveness of JSP and ePTFE patch repair techniques was investigated based on clinical, macroscopic, and microscopic assessments at two and four weeks postoperatively. Results: Survival rates were comparable between groups (p > 0.05). Remarkable mucosal regeneration was evident in all experimental animals by two weeks, showing complete coverage of the jejunal serosal and ePTFE patches by re-epithelialized mucosa with functional villus formation. While partial development of the underlying muscular and serosal layers was observed in both groups at four weeks, the JSP group achieved a significantly higher median histological score (19 vs. 14; p = 0.003). Conversely, the ePTFE group exhibited a major safety concern: a highly significant increase (p ≤ 0.001) in Grade 4 dense, inseparable adhesions throughout the abdominal cavity, which were entirely absent in the JSP group. Conclusions: Both JSP and ePTFE are viable for duodenal reconstruction, but the autologous JSP is superior in tissue healing and safety. Severe adhesions associated with ePTFE constitute a significant clinical concern, limiting its use to a second-line alternative. Consequently, JSP is the preferred option, while ePTFE requires further long-term safety validation.