A Feola1, S Abramowitch1,2, Z Jallah1, S Stein2, W Barone1, S Palcsey2, P Moalli2,3. 1. Musculoskeletal Research Center, Department of Bioengineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. 2. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Magee-Women's Research Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. 3. Division of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Magee-Women's Hospital, Magee-Women's Research Institute, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To define the impact of prolapse mesh on the biomechanical properties of the vagina by comparing the prototype Gynemesh PS (Ethicon) to two new-generation lower stiffness meshes, SmartMesh (Coloplast) and UltraPro (Ethicon). DESIGN: A study employing a nonhuman primate model. SETTING: University of Pittsburgh, PA, USA. POPULATION: Forty-five parous rhesus macaques. METHODS: Meshes were implanted via sacrocolpopexy after hysterectomy and compared with sham. Because its stiffness is highly directional, UltraPro was implanted in two directions: UltraPro Perpendicular (less stiff) and UltraPro Parallel (more stiff), with the indicated direction referring to the position of the blue orientation lines relative to the longitudinal axis of the vagina. The mesh-vaginal complex (MVC) was excised in toto after 3 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Active mechanical properties were quantified as the contractile force generated in the presence of 120 mmol/l KCl. Passive mechanical properties (a tissue's ability to resist an applied force) were measured using a multiaxial protocol. RESULTS: Vaginal contractility decreased by 80% following implantation with the Gynemesh PS (P = 0.001), 48% after SmartMesh (P = 0.001), 68% after UltraPro Parallel (P = 0.001) and was highly variable after UltraPro Perpendicular (P = 0.16). The tissue contribution to the passive mechanical behaviour of the MVC was drastically reduced for Gynemesh PS (P = 0.003), but not for SmartMesh (P = 0.9) or UltraPro independent of the direction of implantation (P = 0.68 and P = 0.66, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Deterioration of the mechanical properties of the vagina was highest following implantation with the stiffest mesh, Gynemesh PS. Such a decrease associated with implantation of a device of increased stiffness is consistent with findings from other systems employing prostheses for support.
OBJECTIVE: To define the impact of prolapse mesh on the biomechanical properties of the vagina by comparing the prototype Gynemesh PS (Ethicon) to two new-generation lower stiffness meshes, SmartMesh (Coloplast) and UltraPro (Ethicon). DESIGN: A study employing a nonhuman primate model. SETTING: University of Pittsburgh, PA, USA. POPULATION: Forty-five parous rhesus macaques. METHODS: Meshes were implanted via sacrocolpopexy after hysterectomy and compared with sham. Because its stiffness is highly directional, UltraPro was implanted in two directions: UltraPro Perpendicular (less stiff) and UltraPro Parallel (more stiff), with the indicated direction referring to the position of the blue orientation lines relative to the longitudinal axis of the vagina. The mesh-vaginal complex (MVC) was excised in toto after 3 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Active mechanical properties were quantified as the contractile force generated in the presence of 120 mmol/l KCl. Passive mechanical properties (a tissue's ability to resist an applied force) were measured using a multiaxial protocol. RESULTS: Vaginal contractility decreased by 80% following implantation with the Gynemesh PS (P = 0.001), 48% after SmartMesh (P = 0.001), 68% after UltraPro Parallel (P = 0.001) and was highly variable after UltraPro Perpendicular (P = 0.16). The tissue contribution to the passive mechanical behaviour of the MVC was drastically reduced for Gynemesh PS (P = 0.003), but not for SmartMesh (P = 0.9) or UltraPro independent of the direction of implantation (P = 0.68 and P = 0.66, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Deterioration of the mechanical properties of the vagina was highest following implantation with the stiffest mesh, Gynemesh PS. Such a decrease associated with implantation of a device of increased stiffness is consistent with findings from other systems employing prostheses for support.
Authors: William S Cobb; Justin M Burns; Richard D Peindl; Alfredo M Carbonell; Brent D Matthews; Kent W Kercher; B Todd Heniford Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2006-09-22 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: William R Barone; Rouzbeh Amini; Spandan Maiti; Pamela A Moalli; Steven D Abramowitch Journal: J Biomech Date: 2015-03-16 Impact factor: 2.712
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: Bryan N Brown; Deepa Mani; Alexis L Nolfi; Rui Liang; Steven D Abramowitch; Pamela A Moalli Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2015-08-07 Impact factor: 8.661