INTRODUCTION: Mesh-related adhesions are a significant clinical problem following intraperitoneal mesh placement. In this study, we evaluated adhesion formation to three relatively new meshes for intraperitoneal use. METHODS: Three new meshes for intraperitoneal use (Omyra(®) mesh, Physiomesh(®), and Hi-Tex Endo-IP(®)) were implanted intraperitoneally in rats and compared with a polypropylene control mesh (Parietene(®)) after 7 or 90 days. Adhesion formation, incorporation (tensile strength), shrinkage, and foreign body reaction were scored. RESULTS: Hi-Tex Endo-IP and Physiomesh(®) showed significantly less adhesion formation when compared to Parietene at both time points (p < 0.05). Shrinkage was highest in Omyra mesh after 90 days, which was significantly more compared to Parietene(®) (p < 0.001). Physiomesh(®) only showed a significant reduction in craniocaudal mesh length, compared to Parietene and Hi-Tex Endo-IP (p < 0.05). After 90 days, Hi-Tex Endo-IP(®) showed significantly higher and Physiomesh(®) significantly lower incorporation strengths compared to all other groups (p < 0.05). Microscopic evaluation revealed massive foreign body reaction to Hi-Tex Endo-IP(®), leading to an extensive and thick collagenous scar adherent to the abdominal wall. Fractioning of the Physiomesh(®) coating over time led to an increase in interfilamentary granuloma formation, leading to scar plate formation, but with only minimal to no abdominal wall adherence. Both Parietene(®) and Omyra(®) showed a mild foreign body response. CONCLUSION: Although clear distinctions can be made between meshes and some meshes excel, none of the meshes are superior in all aspects required for effective and safe incisional hernia repair.
INTRODUCTION: Mesh-related adhesions are a significant clinical problem following intraperitoneal mesh placement. In this study, we evaluated adhesion formation to three relatively new meshes for intraperitoneal use. METHODS: Three new meshes for intraperitoneal use (Omyra(®) mesh, Physiomesh(®), and Hi-Tex Endo-IP(®)) were implanted intraperitoneally in rats and compared with a polypropylene control mesh (Parietene(®)) after 7 or 90 days. Adhesion formation, incorporation (tensile strength), shrinkage, and foreign body reaction were scored. RESULTS:Hi-Tex Endo-IP and Physiomesh(®) showed significantly less adhesion formation when compared to Parietene at both time points (p < 0.05). Shrinkage was highest in Omyra mesh after 90 days, which was significantly more compared to Parietene(®) (p < 0.001). Physiomesh(®) only showed a significant reduction in craniocaudal mesh length, compared to Parietene and Hi-Tex Endo-IP (p < 0.05). After 90 days, Hi-Tex Endo-IP(®) showed significantly higher and Physiomesh(®) significantly lower incorporation strengths compared to all other groups (p < 0.05). Microscopic evaluation revealed massive foreign body reaction to Hi-Tex Endo-IP(®), leading to an extensive and thick collagenous scar adherent to the abdominal wall. Fractioning of the Physiomesh(®) coating over time led to an increase in interfilamentary granuloma formation, leading to scar plate formation, but with only minimal to no abdominal wall adherence. Both Parietene(®) and Omyra(®) showed a mild foreign body response. CONCLUSION: Although clear distinctions can be made between meshes and some meshes excel, none of the meshes are superior in all aspects required for effective and safe incisional hernia repair.
Authors: Eric D Jenkins; Victoria Yom; Lora Melman; L Michael Brunt; J Christopher Eagon; Margaret M Frisella; Brent D Matthews Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2010-05-06 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Marc H F Schreinemacher; Kevin W Y van Barneveld; Rieky E G Dikmans; Marion J J Gijbels; Jan-Willem M Greve; Nicole D Bouvy Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-06-08 Impact factor: 4.584
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
Authors: R Bittner; J Bingener-Casey; U Dietz; M Fabian; G S Ferzli; R H Fortelny; F Köckerling; J Kukleta; K Leblanc; D Lomanto; M C Misra; V K Bansal; S Morales-Conde; B Ramshaw; W Reinpold; S Rim; M Rohr; R Schrittwieser; Th Simon; M Smietanski; B Stechemesser; M Timoney; P Chowbey Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-10-11 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Barbora East; Martin Plencner; Martin Kralovic; Michala Rampichova; Vera Sovkova; Karolina Vocetkova; Martin Otahal; Zbynek Tonar; Yaroslav Kolinko; Evzen Amler; Jiri Hoch Journal: Int J Nanomedicine Date: 2018-05-28
Authors: Ferdinand Köckerling; Thomas Simon; Martin Hukauf; Achim Hellinger; Rene Fortelny; Wolfgang Reinpold; Reinhard Bittner Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: S van Steensel; L C L van den Hil; A Bloemen; M J Gijbels; S O Breukink; J Melenhorst; K Lenaerts; N D Bouvy Journal: Hernia Date: 2019-05-20 Impact factor: 4.739