Literature DB >> 21356487

Biomechanical and histologic evaluation of fenestrated and nonfenestrated biologic mesh in a porcine model of ventral hernia repair.

Eric D Jenkins1, Lora Melman, Corey R Deeken, Suellen C Greco, Margaret M Frisella, Brent D Matthews.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare tissue incorporation and adhesion characteristics of a novel fenestrated versus nonfenestrated crosslinked porcine dermal matrix (CPDM) (Bard CollaMend) in a porcine model of ventral hernia repair. STUDY
DESIGN: Bilateral abdominal wall defects were created in 24 Yucatan minipigs, resulting in 48 defects, which were allowed to mature for 21 days. Twelve defects were repaired with fenestrated CPDM using a preperitoneal technique, 12 with fenestrated CPDM using an intraperitoneal technique, 12 with nonfenestrated CPDM using a preperitoneal technique, and 12 with nonfenestrated CPDM using an intraperitoneal technique. Half of the animals in the intraperitoneal group were euthanized after 1 month, and the other half after 3 months. Similarly, half of the animals in the preperitoneal group were euthanized after 1 month, and the other half after 6 months. Biomechanical testing and histologic evaluation were performed.
RESULTS: Intraperitoneal placement of the CPDM products resulted in significantly greater adhesed area compared with preperitoneal placement (p < 0.05). Tissue ingrowth into preperitoneal fenestrated and nonfenestrated CPDM resulted in significantly greater incorporation strengths after 6 months compared with 1 month (p = 0.03 and p < 0.0001). Histologic analysis showed significantly greater cellular infiltration, extracellular matrix deposition, and neovascularization, with less fibrous encapsulation through the center of the fenestrations compared with all other sites evaluated, including nonfenestrated grafts.
CONCLUSIONS: Histologic findings revealed increased tissue incorporation at fenestration sites compared with nonfenestrated grafts regardless of implant location or time in vivo. However, preperitoneal placement resulted in greater incorporation strength, less adhesed area, and lower adhesion scores compared with intraperitoneal placement for both fenestrated and nonfenestrated CPDM.
Copyright © 2011 American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21356487      PMCID: PMC3783002          DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.12.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Surg        ISSN: 1072-7515            Impact factor:   6.113


  18 in total

1.  Tissue reaction to intraperitoneally implanted catheter materials.

Authors:  E S Wilkins
Journal:  J Biomed Eng       Date:  1991-03

2.  Effect of well defined dodecahedral porosity on inflammation and angiogenesis.

Authors:  Deon Bezuidenhout; Neil Davies; Peter Zilla
Journal:  ASAIO J       Date:  2002 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.872

3.  Pore morphology effects on the fibrovascular tissue growth in porous polymer substrates.

Authors:  M C Wake; C W Patrick; A G Mikos
Journal:  Cell Transplant       Date:  1994 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.064

4.  Adhesion formation is reduced after laparoscopic surgery.

Authors:  C L Garrard; R H Clements; L Nanney; J M Davidson; W O Richards
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Porosity in silver-tin amalgams.

Authors:  D F Taylor
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res       Date:  1972-09

6.  Evaluation of fenestrated and non-fenestrated biologic grafts in a porcine model of mature ventral incisional hernia repair.

Authors:  E D Jenkins; L Melman; C R Deeken; S C Greco; M M Frisella; B D Matthews
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2010-06-12       Impact factor: 4.739

7.  Calcification of bovine pericardium: glutaraldehyde versus No-React biomodification.

Authors:  A Abolhoda; S Yu; J R Oyarzun; J R McCormick; J D Bogden; S Gabbay
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 4.330

8.  The role of crosslinking in modification of the immune response elicited against xenogenic vascular acellular matrices.

Authors:  D W Courtman; B F Errett; G J Wilson
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res       Date:  2001-06-15

9.  Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia.

Authors:  Jacobus W A Burger; Roland W Luijendijk; Wim C J Hop; Jens A Halm; Emiel G G Verdaasdonk; Johannes Jeekel
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  Assessment of adhesion formation to intra-abdominal polypropylene mesh and polytetrafluoroethylene mesh.

Authors:  Brent D Matthews; Broc L Pratt; Harrison S Pollinger; Charles L Backus; Kent W Kercher; R F Sing; B Todd Heniford
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 2.192

View more
  8 in total

1.  Combined in vivo and ex vivo analysis of mesh mechanics in a porcine hernia model.

Authors:  Lindsey G Kahan; Spencer P Lake; Jared M McAllister; Wen Hui Tan; Jennifer Yu; Dominic Thompson; L Michael Brunt; Jeffrey A Blatnik
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-07-21       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Atraumatic laparoscopic intraperitoneal mesh fixation using a new laparoscopic device: an animal experimental study.

Authors:  R N Villalobos; M C Mias; C Gas; Y Maestre; M Nogués; F Vilardell; J J Olsina
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2019-07-19       Impact factor: 4.739

3.  Cross-linked xenogenic collagen implantation in the sheep model for vaginal surgery.

Authors:  Masayuki Endo; Iva Urbankova; Jaromir Vlacil; Siddarth Sengupta; Thomas Deprest; Bernd Klosterhalfen; Andrew Feola; Jan Deprest
Journal:  Gynecol Surg       Date:  2015-02-05

Review 4.  Biomaterials for pelvic floor reconstructive surgery: how can we do better?

Authors:  Giulia Gigliobianco; Sabiniano Roman Regueros; Nadir I Osman; Julio Bissoli; Anthony J Bullock; Chris R Chapple; Sheila MacNeil
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2015-04-21       Impact factor: 3.411

5.  A Prospective Study Assessing Complication Rates and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Breast Reconstructions Using a Novel, Deep Dermal Human Acellular Dermal Matrix.

Authors:  Michael M Vu; Gildasio S De Oliveira; Kristen E Mayer; Jordan T Blough; John Y S Kim
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2016-01-07

6.  A clinically relevant in vivo model for the assessment of scaffold efficacy in abdominal wall reconstruction.

Authors:  Jeffrey Cy Chan; Krishna Burugapalli; Yi-Shiang Huang; John L Kelly; Abhay Pandit
Journal:  J Tissue Eng       Date:  2016-12-30       Impact factor: 7.813

7.  Italian Biological Prosthesis Work-Group (IBPWG): proposal for a decisional model in using biological prosthesis.

Authors:  Federico Coccolini; Ferdinando Agresta; Andrea Bassi; Fausto Catena; Feliciano Crovella; Roberto Ferrara; Francesco Gossetti; Domenico Marchi; Gabriele Munegato; Paolo Negro; Micaela Piccoli; Gianluigi Melotti; Massimo Sartelli; Michele Schiano di Visconte; Mario Testini; Paolo Bertoli; Michela Giulii Capponi; Marco Lotti; Roberto Manfredi; Michele Pisano; Elia Poiasina; Eugenio Poletti; Luca Ansaloni
Journal:  World J Emerg Surg       Date:  2012-11-02       Impact factor: 5.469

8.  Decreased hernia recurrence using autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) with Strattice™ mesh in a rodent ventral hernia model.

Authors:  Jeffrey Van Eps; Joseph Fernandez-Moure; Fernando Cabrera; Xin Wang; Azim Karim; Bruna Corradetti; Paige Chan; Brian Dunkin; Ennio Tasciotti; Bradley Weiner; Warren Ellsworth
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-11-17       Impact factor: 4.584

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.