Literature DB >> 23868096

Long term behavior of biological prostheses used as abdominal wall substitutes.

G Pascual1, S Sotomayor2, P Pérez-López3, J Buján2, J M Bellón3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite their degradation in the host organism, the benefits of collagen bioprostheses remain unclear. This study addresses the absorption and long-term host tissue incorporation of several collagen biomeshes.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Partial ventral hernial defects created in the abdominal wall of rabbits were repaired using the crosslinked meshes Permacol® or CollaMend®, or the non-crosslinked Surgisis®, Tutomesh® or Strattice®. After 90 and 180 days of implant, morphological studies and morphometric analysis of the thickness of the meshes were performed. Immunofluorescence confocal microscopy combined with differential interference contrast (DIC) imaging was used to distinguish newly formed collagen from that comprising the mesh. The macrophage response was examined by immunohistochemistry.
RESULTS: At 90 days, the thinner non-crosslinked biomeshes Tutomesh and Surgisis were more fully degraded with much of their collagen replaced with loose connective tissue. By 180 days, both implants had been practically fully absorbed. In contrast, in Strattice only the outermost third was infiltrated by neoformed tissue. On both surfaces of the crosslinked meshes, a fibrous capsule with host cells lining its perimeter was observed at both time points, though at 180 days these cells had penetrated the mesh interior. At both implant times, Strattice showed the higher expression of collagen type I while collagen III expression was similar for all the meshes. The non-crosslinked materials elicited lower macrophage counts at both time points, significantly so for Strattice. The macrophage response decreased over time for all the meshes but Surgisis.
CONCLUSIONS: Strattice, the thicker, more compacted non-crosslinked mesh showed the best balance between tissue incorporation and absorption while eliciting a minimal foreign-body reaction in the long-term.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23868096     DOI: 10.14670/HH-29.139

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Histol Histopathol        ISSN: 0213-3911            Impact factor:   2.303


  6 in total

Review 1.  Laparoscopic augmentation of the diaphragmatic hiatus with biologic mesh versus suture repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Stavros A Antoniou; Beat P Müller-Stich; George A Antoniou; Gernot Köhler; Ruzica-Rosalia Luketina; Oliver O Koch; Rudolph Pointner; Frank-Alexander Granderath
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2015-06-07       Impact factor: 3.445

Review 2.  Challenges and future prospects for tissue engineering in female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery.

Authors:  Bertha Chen; Bhumy Dave
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 3.  Management of Perineal Wounds Following Pelvic Surgery.

Authors:  George A Mori; Jim P Tiernan
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2022-03-07

Review 4.  Biological mesh reconstruction of the pelvic floor following abdominoperineal excision for cancer: A review.

Authors:  Boris Schiltz; Nicolas Christian Buchs; Marta Penna; Cosimo Riccardo Scarpa; Emilie Liot; Philippe Morel; Frederic Ris
Journal:  World J Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-06-10

5.  Optimizing Outcomes of Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction With Acellular Dermal Matrix: A Review of Recent Clinical Data.

Authors:  Michael Zenn; Mark Venturi; Troy Pittman; Scott Spear; Geoffrey Gurtner; Geoffrey Robb; Alex Mesbahi; Joseph Dayan
Journal:  Eplasty       Date:  2017-06-12

6.  Results at 3-year follow-up of totally extraperitoneal (TEP) hernia surgery with long-term resorbable mesh.

Authors:  F Ruiz-Jasbon; K Ticehurst; J Ahonen; J Norrby; P Falk; M-L Ivarsson
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2020-01-10       Impact factor: 4.739

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.