scholarly journals Biomechanics in Surgical Mesh Fixation for Abdominal Wall Repair

Author(s):  
Silvia Todros
Author(s):  
Daniel Eberli ◽  
Sergio Rodriguez ◽  
Anthony Atala ◽  
James J. Yoo

Biomaterials ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 27 (5) ◽  
pp. 758-768 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.A. Arbos ◽  
J.M. Ferrando ◽  
M.T. Quiles ◽  
J. Vidal ◽  
M. López-Cano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

2005 ◽  
Vol 20 (5) ◽  
pp. 347-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alberto Goldenberg ◽  
Jacques Matone ◽  
Wagner Marcondes ◽  
Fernando Augusto Mardiros Herbella ◽  
José Francisco de Mattos Farah

PURPOSE: Compare, in a rabbit model, the inflammatory response and adhesions formation following surgical fixation of polypropilene and Vypro mesh in the inguinal preperitoneal space. METHODS: Fourteen male New Zealand rabbits, weighing between 2.000 to 2.500 g were used. A midline incision was made and the peritoneal cavity was exposed. The 2,0X1,0 cm polypropylene mesh was fixed in the left flank and secured to the margins with 3-0 prolene in a separate pattern. In the right flank, a 2,0X1,0 cm Vypro II mesh was sewn in the same way. After the post surgical period, the animals were again anesthetized and underwent laparoscopic approach, in order to identify and evaluate adhesions degree. Both fixed prosthesis were excised bilaterally with the abdominal wall segment, including peritoneum, aponeurosis and muscle and sent to a pathologist RESULTS: Operative time ranged from 15 to 25 minutes and no difficulties in applying the mesh were found. From the 14 polypropylene meshes fixed to the intact peritoneum, 11 had adhesions to the abdominal cavity (78,6%). Concerning Vypro mesh, 12 animals developed adhesions from the 14 with mesh fixation (85,7%). Histological examination of tissues harvested revealed fibroblasts, collagen, macrophages and lymphocytes between the threads of the mesh. CONCLUSION: Polypropylene and Vypro mesh, when implanted in the peritoneal cavity of rabbits provoke similar amount of adhesions. Vypro mesh tissues had higher fibrosis resulting in better mesh incorporation to the abdominal wall.


2017 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
pp. 136-139
Author(s):  
Francesca Ceci ◽  
Linda D’Amore ◽  
Maria Romana Grimaldi ◽  
Elena Annesi ◽  
Domenico Tuscano ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Spyridon Kapoulas ◽  
Apostolos Papalois ◽  
Georgios Papadakis ◽  
Georgios Tsoulfas ◽  
Emmanouil Christoforidis ◽  
...  

Abstract Aim Choice of the best fixation system in terms of safety and effectiveness for intraperitoneal mesh placement in hernia surgery remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of four fixation systems in a swine model of intraperitoneal mesh fixation. Material and Methods Fourteen Landrace swine were utilized and the experiment included two stages. Initially, four pieces of polypropylene mesh with hydrogel barrier coating1 were fixed intraperitoneally to reinforce 4 small full thickness abdominal wall defects created with diathermy. Each mesh was anchored with a different tack device between titanium2, steel3 or absorbable (4,5) fasteners. The second stage took place after 60 days and included euthanasia, laparoscopy, and laparotomy. The primary endpoint was to compare the peel strength of the compound tack/mesh from the abdominal wall. Secondary parameters were the extent and quality of visceral adhesions to the mesh, the degree of mesh shrinkage and the histological response around the tacks. Results Thirteen out of 14 animals survived the experiment and 10 were included in the final analysis. Steel tacks had higher peel strength when compared to titanium and absorbable fasteners. No significant differences were noted regarding the secondary endpoints. Conclusions Steel fasteners provided higher peel strength that the other devices in this swine model of intraperitoneal mesh fixation. Our findings generate the hypothesis that this type of fixation may be superior in a clinical setting. Clinical trials with long-term follow-up are required to assess the safety and efficacy of mesh fixation systems in hernia surgery.


2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (7) ◽  
pp. 955-963
Author(s):  
Remya Vellachi ◽  
Naveen Kumar ◽  
Sameer Shrivastava ◽  
Sonal Saxena ◽  
Swapan Kumar Maiti ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document