Literature DB >> 15348095

Evaluation of the acute scarring response to the implant of different types of biomaterial in the abdominal wall.

J M Bellón1, L A Contreras, G Pascual, J Buján.   

Abstract

Since the short-term, acute scarring process induced by a biomaterial may condition the evolution of the repair process, the present investigation evaluates the behavior of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) and polypropylene (PL) biomaterials in the initial stages of repair. Three PTFE biomaterials (Mycro Mesh, Dual Mesh and Soft Tissue Patch) and one PL biomaterial (Marlex) were employed to repair defects created in the abdominal wall of New Zealand rabbits. Animals were sacrificed at 3 or 7 days. Specimens were obtained for light and scanning electron microscopy, and immunohistochemical analysis using the RAM-11 monoclonal antibody for rabbit macrophages. The PL implants showed substantial adhesion formation with viscera. Lower adhesion formation was detected in the PTFE implants. The evolution of the acute phase of the repair process was similar for each PTFE biomaterial. At 3 days post implant, an incipient neoperitoneum was detected which was fully established after 7 days. The behavior of the PL implant was similar, although a greater amount of reticular granulation was detected. The neoformed peritoneum was irregular. Few RAM-11-labeled macrophages were detected in all cases. The acute phase of the tissue repair process induced by the implant of PTFE and PL biomaterials generally proceeds along similar lines to a normal repair process. However, the use of microporous, laminar materials seems to favor the early establishment of a well-defined neoperitoneal layer. Copyright 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers

Entities:  

Year:  2000        PMID: 15348095     DOI: 10.1023/a:1008981517743

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med        ISSN: 0957-4530            Impact factor:   3.896


  12 in total

1.  Experimental evaluation of a new composite mesh with the selective property of incorporation to the abdominal wall without adhering to the intestines.

Authors:  P K Amid; A G Shulman; I L Lichtenstein; S Sostrin; J Young; M Hakakha
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res       Date:  1994-03

2.  Comparison of Marlex and Gore-tex to repair abdominal wall defects in the rat.

Authors:  J L Murphy; J B Freeman; P G Dionne
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  1989-07       Impact factor: 2.089

3.  Comparison of a new type of polytetrafluoroethylene patch (Mycro Mesh) and polypropylene prosthesis (Marlex) for repair of abdominal wall defects.

Authors:  J M Bellón; J Buján; L A Contreras; A Carrera-San Martín; F Jurado
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 6.113

4.  Experimental assay of a Dual Mesh polytetrafluoroethylene prosthesis (non-porous on one side) in the repair of abdominal wall defects.

Authors:  J M Bellón; L A Contreras; J Buján; A Carrea-San Martin
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 12.479

5.  Use of nonporous polytetrafluoroethylene prosthesis in combination with polypropylene prosthetic abdominal wall implants in prevention of peritoneal adhesions.

Authors:  J M Bellón; J Buján; L A Contreras; F Jurado
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res       Date:  1997

6.  A comparison of intraperitoneal prostheses for the repair of abdominal muscular wall defects in rats.

Authors:  A Pans; G E Pierard
Journal:  Eur Surg Res       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 1.745

7.  Comparison of prosthetic materials for abdominal wall reconstruction in the presence of contamination and infection.

Authors:  G L Brown; J D Richardson; M A Malangoni; G R Tobin; D Ackerman; H C Polk
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1985-06       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Double-layer prostheses for repair of abdominal wall defects in a rabbit model.

Authors:  A P Walker; J Henderson; R E Condon
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 2.192

9.  Integration of biomaterials implanted into abdominal wall: process of scar formation and macrophage response.

Authors:  J M Bellón; J Buján; L Contreras; A Hernando
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 12.479

10.  Macrophage response to experimental implantation of polypropylene prostheses.

Authors:  J M Bellón; J Bujan; L Contreras; A Hernando; F Jurado
Journal:  Eur Surg Res       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 1.745

View more
  5 in total

1.  Postimplantation host tissue response and biodegradation of biologic versus polymer meshes implanted in an intraperitoneal position.

Authors:  G Pascual; B Pérez-Köhler; M Rodríguez; S Sotomayor; Juan M Bellón
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-09-18       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  Biocompatibility of prosthetic meshes in abdominal surgery.

Authors:  Marcel Binnebösel; Klaus T von Trotha; Petra Lynen Jansen; Joachim Conze; Ulf P Neumann; Karsten Junge
Journal:  Semin Immunopathol       Date:  2011-01-12       Impact factor: 9.623

3.  Evaluation of a knitted polytetrafluoroethylene mesh placed intraperitoneally in a New Zealand white rabbit model.

Authors:  Tomáš Novotný; Jiří Jeřábek; Karel Veselý; Robert Staffa; Martin Dvořák; Jan Cagaš
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-01-05       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Biodegradable hyaluronan hydrogel coatings on acellular dermis grafts-A potential strategy to improve biologic graft durability in hernia repair application.

Authors:  Sambit Sahoo; Jinjin Ma; Luciano Tastaldi; Andrew R Baker; Jacki Loftis; Michael J Rosen; Kathleen A Derwin
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater       Date:  2019-03-12       Impact factor: 3.368

5.  In vitro mesothelialization of prosthetic materials designed for the repair of abdominal wall defects.

Authors:  J M Bellón; N García-Honduvilla; R López; C Corrales; F Jurado; J Buján
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 3.896

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.