BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A contaminated or infected surgical site is considered a contraindication for the use of the nonabsorbable alloplastic materials employed to repair abdominal wall defects. Therefore, the biocompatibility of new prosthetic materials was investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Meshes measuring 1.5x1.5 cm made of conventional and titanium-coated polypropylene, polyglycol, or porcine dermal collagen were implanted under the abdominal wall of 96 rats (eight groups of 12 animals each) employing the inlay technique. Implantation of all four materials was performed both under semisterile conditions and bacterial contamination of the mesh. The meshes were explanted after 28 days. RESULTS: All the materials implanted under semisterile conditions were incorporated into the abdominal wall with only few intraabdominal adhesions (mean adhesion scores: 1.0, 1.2, 1.0, 0.8 points, respectively, not significant). With the porcine dermal collagen, proliferation rate and the proportion of inflammatory cells were statistically lower (p<0.01). In the bacterial contamination group, all meshes were associated with a suppurating infection and strong adhesions between the bowel and mesh, which were most prominent in the case of dermal collagen (mean adhesion scores: 1.6, 1.7, 1.7, and 1.9 points, respectively, not significant). In this group, two animals died of peritonitis. In comparison with the other materials, the proliferation rate was significantly elevated (p=0.03). No significant differences were seen between the other materials employed. CONCLUSION: Irrespective of the material employed, implantation of alloplastic meshes in an abdominal wall contaminated with bacteria, is associated with suppurating infections, in particular in the case of the membrane-like porcine dermal collagen. Nonabsorbable alloplastic meshes and dermal skin grafts should therefore not be used to repair infected abdominal wall defects.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A contaminated or infected surgical site is considered a contraindication for the use of the nonabsorbable alloplastic materials employed to repair abdominal wall defects. Therefore, the biocompatibility of new prosthetic materials was investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Meshes measuring 1.5x1.5 cm made of conventional and titanium-coated polypropylene, polyglycol, or porcine dermal collagen were implanted under the abdominal wall of 96 rats (eight groups of 12 animals each) employing the inlay technique. Implantation of all four materials was performed both under semisterile conditions and bacterial contamination of the mesh. The meshes were explanted after 28 days. RESULTS: All the materials implanted under semisterile conditions were incorporated into the abdominal wall with only few intraabdominal adhesions (mean adhesion scores: 1.0, 1.2, 1.0, 0.8 points, respectively, not significant). With the porcine dermal collagen, proliferation rate and the proportion of inflammatory cells were statistically lower (p<0.01). In the bacterial contamination group, all meshes were associated with a suppurating infection and strong adhesions between the bowel and mesh, which were most prominent in the case of dermal collagen (mean adhesion scores: 1.6, 1.7, 1.7, and 1.9 points, respectively, not significant). In this group, two animals died of peritonitis. In comparison with the other materials, the proliferation rate was significantly elevated (p=0.03). No significant differences were seen between the other materials employed. CONCLUSION: Irrespective of the material employed, implantation of alloplastic meshes in an abdominal wall contaminated with bacteria, is associated with suppurating infections, in particular in the case of the membrane-like porcine dermal collagen. Nonabsorbable alloplastic meshes and dermal skin grafts should therefore not be used to repair infected abdominal wall defects.
Authors: R W Luijendijk; W C Hop; M P van den Tol; D C de Lange; M M Braaksma; J N IJzermans; R U Boelhouwer; B C de Vries; M K Salu; J C Wereldsma; C M Bruijninckx; J Jeekel Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2000-08-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Martijne van 't Riet; Peggy J de Vos van Steenwijk; Fred Bonthuis; Richard L Marquet; Ewout W Steyerberg; Johannes Jeekel; H Jaap Bonjer Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: A Díaz-Godoy; M A García-Ureña; J López-Monclús; V Vega Ruíz; D Melero Montes; N Erquinigo Agurto Journal: Hernia Date: 2010-12-09 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: O Guillaume; B Pérez Kohler; R Fortelny; H Redl; F Moriarty; R G Richards; D Eglin; A Petter Puchner Journal: Hernia Date: 2018-08-28 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: J M Suárez-Grau; S Morales-Conde; V González Galán; J A Martín Cartes; F Docobo Durantez; F J Padillo Ruiz Journal: Hernia Date: 2014-12-18 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: Ryotaro Hashizume; Kazuro L Fujimoto; Yi Hong; Nicholas J Amoroso; Kimimasa Tobita; Toshio Miki; Bradley B Keller; Michael S Sacks; William R Wagner Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2010-02-06 Impact factor: 12.479