Orman, SuleymanYol, SinanUzun, HuseyinCeyran, Ayse Bahar2022-02-222022-02-222018Orman, S., Yol, S., Uzun, H., & Bahar Ceyran, A. (2021). Comparison of the microvessel density of gastric regions in normal and sleeve gastrectomized rats . Annals of Medical Researchhttps://hdl.handle.net/11616/53830Aim: Background: The aim of this study is to compare the microvessel densities of different normal gastric regions and to determine the effects of sleeve gastrectomy on the microvessel density of tissues alongside the remnant stomach. Material and Methods: Twenty male Wistar albino rats were divided into two groups. Rats in the control group were immediately sleeve gastrectomized under anesthesia and a wedge resection of the esophagogastric junction (EGJ), the fundus, corpus and antral gastric regions was performed, before sacrifice. Meanwhile, rats in the experiment group also underwent sleeve gastrectomy but were not sacrificed until the 5th postoperative day. At this point, gastric tissues alongside the sleeve gastrectomy area were then wedge-resected. The microvessel densities of these two groups were evaluated and compared. Results: When comparing distinctive gastric regions within the control group, the microvessel density of the esophagogastric junction was found to be less than in the corpus or fundus (20.04±4.45; 36.28±9.98, 39.4±9.57; p <0.01). When comparing the control and experiment groups, No significant difference in the microvessel density of the esophagogastric junction was found (20.04 ± 4.45, 24.63 ± 8.91, p> 0.05). The sleeve gastrectomy also had no significant effect on the microvessel densities at the esophagogastric junction or corpus (24.63±8.91, 22.24±7,63; p> 0.05). Conclusion: The esophagogastric junction has a lower microvessel density than the corpus in a normal stomach. Sleeve gastrectomy has no adverse effect on the microvessel density of the esophagogastric junction.eninfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessComparison of the microvessel density of gastric regions in normal and sleeve gastrectomized ratsArticle10.5455/annalsmedres.2018.07.148 2018;25(4)589-93