Evaluation of Soft Tissue Attachments to a Novel Intra-abdominal Prosthetic in a Rabbit Model
ABSTRACT Background. Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair requires placement of an intraperitoneal prosthetic. Composite mesh types have been developed to address the shortcomings of standard meshes. The authors evaluated the host reaction to intraperitoneal placement of a novel composite material. Materials and Methods. A comparison of an innovative polypropylene/polylactide composite mesh was made to Parietex Composite (PCO), Proceed, and DualMesh. Eighteen meshes per group were implanted on intact peritoneum in New Zealand White rabbits. The main outcome measures included the formation of visceral adhesions, adhesion tenacity, tensiometric measurements, and histological analysis. Evaluations of adhesions were made at 1, 4, and 16 weeks using a 2-mm minilaparoscopy. Results. There were no significant differences in the mean adhesion scores between the composite mesh types at week 1 (P = .15) and week 16 (P = .06). At 4 weeks, PCO had significantly fewer adhesions when compared with the other 3 mesh types (P = .02). Adhesion tenacity was also equivalent within the group at 16 weeks (P = .06). Tensiometry and histological analysis revealed no statistically significant differences between the mesh types. Conclusions. Four different composite mesh types had equivalent intra-abdominal soft tissue attachments in a rabbit model after a 16-week implantation period. PCO demonstrated the lowest mean adhesion score of each mesh type. Each mesh exhibited equivalent stiffness and energy to failure after explantation. The 4 composite mesh types demonstrated the successful formation of a neoperitoneum and comparable host biocompatibility as evidenced by similar degrees of inflammation.
- SourceAvailable from: Gaspar Jesus Lopes Filho[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To investigate abdominal wound healing using specific biomaterials in incisional hernias. Incisional hernias were produced in 40 rabbits, after that they were reoperated with or without the use of meshes: PREMILENE® (PPL), ULTRAPRO® (UP), PROCEED® (PCD) or repairing without mesh (TRANSPALB). After 30 days a macroscopic and microscopic study of the part withdrawn from the abdominal wall was performed. Macroscopic: adhesion Area: PPL> UP and PCD (p = 0.031). Vascularization: PPL> UP and PCD (p = 0.001). PPL groups (p = 0.032) and PCD (p <0.001) showed greater meshes shrinkages when compared to UP. Microscopic: neutrophils: PCD> PPL, UP and TRANSPALB (p = 0.010); eosinophils: PPL> UP, and TRANSPALB PCD (p = 0.010); granulation tissue: PPL and PCD> UP and TRANSPALB (p <0.001); macrophages : PPL, UP and PCD> TRANSPALB (p <0.001); lymphocytes: PPL and PCD> UP (p = 0.009) and TRANSPALB (p <0.001); giant cells: PPL, UP and PCD> TRANSPALB (p <0.001); viscera adhered: PPL and UP> PCD and TRANSPALB (p <0.001). All types of meshes caused the formation of adhesions. The UP and PCD groups showed lower area and vascularization of the adhesions. The PPL and PCD groups showed higher meshes shrinkage and there was a predominance of acute inflammatory process in the PCD group.Acta cirurgica brasileira / Sociedade Brasileira para Desenvolvimento Pesquisa em Cirurgia 04/2013; 28(4):307-16. DOI:10.1590/S0102-86502013000400011 · 0.48 Impact Factor