INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: To assess the biomechanical properties of full-thickness abdominal wall defects, either using Native tissues, with or without Overlay, and by substitution of the Defect by small intestinal submucosa mesh. METHODS: Seventy-two rats were divided into three groups according to repair method (Native, Overlay or Defect). At 7, 14, 30, and 90 days, six rats were sacrificed to measure tensile strength, collagen ingrowth, and host response. RESULTS: Explants had comparable strength at 30 days, the majority rupturing at the interface. Afterwards, the Native group was more resistant than both small intestine submucosa (SIS) groups with a more organized fibrotic scar on histology at 90 days. CONCLUSIONS: SIS augmentation of native tissue repair does not increase strength. Replacement of abdominal wall by SIS is equally strong when compared to the SIS-augmented group; however, materials preferably rupture at the site of the implant itself.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: To assess the biomechanical properties of full-thickness abdominal wall defects, either using Native tissues, with or without Overlay, and by substitution of the Defect by small intestinal submucosa mesh. METHODS: Seventy-two rats were divided into three groups according to repair method (Native, Overlay or Defect). At 7, 14, 30, and 90 days, six rats were sacrificed to measure tensile strength, collagen ingrowth, and host response. RESULTS: Explants had comparable strength at 30 days, the majority rupturing at the interface. Afterwards, the Native group was more resistant than both small intestine submucosa (SIS) groups with a more organized fibrotic scar on histology at 90 days. CONCLUSIONS: SIS augmentation of native tissue repair does not increase strength. Replacement of abdominal wall by SIS is equally strong when compared to the SIS-augmented group; however, materials preferably rupture at the site of the implant itself.
Authors: Wesley S Hilger; Andrew Walter; Mark E Zobitz; Kevin O Leslie; Paul Magtibay; Jeffrey Cornella Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2006-10-05 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Maja L Konstantinovic; Pieter Lagae; Fang Zheng; Eric K Verbeken; Dirk De Ridder; Jan A Deprest Journal: BJOG Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 6.531
Authors: Filip Claerhout; Godelieve Verbist; Eric Verbeken; Maja Konstantinovic; Dirk De Ridder; Jan Deprest Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Yves Ozog; Maja L Konstantinovic; Erika Werbrouck; Dirk De Ridder; Mazza Edoardo; Jan Deprest Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2011-05-12 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Masayuki Endo; Andrew Feola; Nikhil Sindhwani; Stefano Manodoro; Jarek Vlacil; Alexander Carl Engels; Filip Claus; Jan A Deprest Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2014-01-22 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Daniela Ulrich; Sharon L Edwards; Jacinta F White; Tommy Supit; John A M Ramshaw; Camden Lo; Anna Rosamilia; Jerome A Werkmeister; Caroline E Gargett Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-11-20 Impact factor: 3.240