Literature DB >> 23481559

One-year outcome of biological and synthetic bioabsorbable meshes for augmentation of large abdominal wall defects in a rabbit model.

Ellen Peeters1, Kevin W Y van Barneveld, Marc H Schreinemacher, Gert De Hertogh, Yves Ozog, Nicole Bouvy, Marc Miserez.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Long-term efficacy of biological and synthetic bioabsorbable meshes for large hernia repair is currently unclear. This rabbit study is aimed at investigating 1-y outcome of biological and synthetic bioabsorbable meshes for augmentation of large abdominal wall defects.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 46 rabbits, an 11 × 4 cm, full-thickness abdominal wall defect was repaired primarily, or with cross-linked (Permacol, Collamend) or non-cross-linked (Surgisis 4-ply, Surgisis Biodesign) biological, synthetic bioabsorbable (GORE BIO-A Tissue Reinforcement [TR], TIGR Matrix Surgical Mesh [MSM]), or polypropylene (Bard Mesh) meshes, using the underlay augmentation technique. One year after surgery, primary outcome was recurrence; secondary outcomes were tensile strength, histologic degree of tissue remodeling, and intraabdominal adhesion formation.
RESULTS: Only two Surgisis 4-ply animals (50%) presented with a recurrent hernia. All GORE BIO-A TR meshes were completely resorbed and, as after primary repair, well-organized connective tissue without inflammation was present, with moderate adhesion formation and sufficient tensile strength. Cross-linked biological and TIGR MSM meshes demonstrated highest tensile strength but were only partially incorporated, with similar foreign body reaction and adhesion formation as polypropylene meshes in the TIGR MSM group, and minimal degradation and moderate adhesion formation in the cross-linked biological group. In the non-cross-linked biological group sufficient tensile strength and moderate adhesion formation were found, with pronounced inflammation if mesh remnants were present.
CONCLUSIONS: Synthetic bioabsorbable GORE BIO-A TR meshes were associated with optimal tissue remodeling, with complete resorption, presence of well-organized tissue, and no inflammation. However, mesh augmentation had no advantages regarding recurrence rate versus primary repair of large abdominal wall defects.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23481559     DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2013.01.025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Surg Res        ISSN: 0022-4804            Impact factor:   2.192


  14 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.  Surgical mesh for ventral incisional hernia repairs: Understanding mesh design.

Authors:  Ali Rastegarpour; Michael Cheung; Madhurima Vardhan; Mohamed M Ibrahim; Charles E Butler; Howard Levinson
Journal:  Plast Surg (Oakv)       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 0.947

3.  Effects of mesenchymal stem cell and fibroblast coating on immunogenic potential of prosthetic meshes in vitro.

Authors:  Yue Gao; David M Krpata; Cory N Criss; Lijia Liu; Natasza Posielski; Michael J Rosen; Yuri W Novitsky
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-06-28       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Case-matched series of a non-cross-linked biologic versus non-absorbable mesh in laparoscopic ventral rectopexy.

Authors:  James W Ogilvie; Andrew R L Stevenson; Michael Powar
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2014-10-15       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  Abdominal wall reinforcement: biologic vs. degradable synthetic devices.

Authors:  S Gruber-Blum; J Brand; C Keibl; R H Fortelny; H Redl; F Mayer; A H Petter-Puchner
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2016-12-23       Impact factor: 4.739

6.  Cell-coating affects tissue integration of synthetic and biologic meshes: comparative analysis of the onlay and underlay mesh positioning in rats.

Authors:  Arnab Majumder; Yue Gao; Emanuel E Sadava; James M Anderson; Yuri W Novitsky
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-02-19       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Laparoscopic management of large hiatus hernia: five-year cohort study and comparison of mesh-augmented versus standard crura repair.

Authors:  Emanuele Asti; Andrea Lovece; Luigi Bonavina; Pamela Milito; Andrea Sironi; Gianluca Bonitta; Stefano Siboni
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-04-29       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  META Score: An International Consensus Scoring System on Mesh-Tissue Adhesions.

Authors:  L C L van den Hil; E H H Mommers; J W A M Bosmans; S Morales-Conde; V Gómez-Gil; K LeBlanc; A Vanlander; E Reynvoet; F Berrevoet; S Gruber-Blum; E Altinli; C R Deeken; R H Fortelny; J W Greve; K Chiers; R Kaufmann; J F Lange; U Klinge; M Miserez; A H Petter-Puchner; M H F Schreinemacher; N D Bouvy
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 3.352

9.  Diaphragm Repair with a Novel Cross-Linked Collagen Biomaterial in a Growing Rabbit Model.

Authors:  Steffi Mayer; Herbert Decaluwe; Michele Ruol; Stefano Manodoro; Manuel Kramer; Holger Till; Jan Deprest
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-06       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Reconstruction of large-size abdominal wall defect using biodegradable poly-p-dioxanone mesh: an experimental canine study.

Authors:  Kenan Huang; Xinyu Ding; Benbo Lv; Linyun Wei; Juxian Sun; Zhifei Xu; Xiong Qin; Hua Tang
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2014-03-14       Impact factor: 2.754

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.