Dataset Information

Biomechanical Parameters of Mesh Reinforcement and Analysis of a Novel Device for Incisional Hernia Prevention.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Prophylactic mesh augmentation (PMA) is an effective technique utilized to reduce the risk of incisional hernia. This study analyzes the biomechanical characteristics of a mesh-reinforced closure and evaluates a novel prophylactic mesh implantation device (SafeClose Roller System; SRS).

Materials and methods

A total of eight senior-level general surgery trainees (≥4 years of training) from the University of Pennsylvania Health System participated in the study. Biomechanical strength, mesh stiffness, mesh uniformity, and time efficiency for fixation were compared among hand-sewn mesh fixation, SRS mesh fixation and a no-mesh fixation control. Porcine abdominal wall specimens served as simulated laparotomy models.

Results

Biomechanical load strength was significantly higher for mesh reinforced repairs (P = 0.009). The SRS resulted in a stronger biomechanical force than hand-sewn mesh (21.2 N stronger, P = 0.317), with more uniform mesh placement (P < 0.01), faster time of fixation (P < 0.001) and with less discrete hand-movements (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Mesh reinforcement for incisional reinforcement has a significant impact on the strength of the closure. The utilization of a mesh-application system has the potential to amplify the advantages of mesh reinforcement by providing efficiency and consistency to fixation methods, with similar biomechanical strength to hand-sewn mesh. Additional in vivo analysis and randomized controlled trials are needed to further assess clinical efficacy.

SUBMITTER: Messa CA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7736547 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionIncisional hernia (IH) is a common complication of abdominal surgery affecting between 10% and 20% of patients and is associated with significant morbidity along with cost to the National Health Service. With high recurrence rates following repair, focus must be on prevention of IH rather than cure. There is an increasing evidence that patients at high risk of developing IH may benefit from prophylactic mesh placement during their index operation. With recent controversy surrounding the use of mesh in the UK, however, there is little understanding of whether this intervention would be acceptable to patients.Methods and analysisINVITE is a mixed-methods, cross-sectional study to explore patient perceptions of the use of mesh as prophylaxis to prevent IH. Patients with and without IH who have undergone colorectal surgery between 2017 and 2020 in a single UK health-board will be approached to participate. 120 participants will be asked to complete a questionnaire and a subgroup of 24 participants will be invited to semistructured interviews. The primary outcome is to assess the acceptability of prophylactic mesh to patients. Secondary outcomes include understanding patients' knowledge of IH, and factors that may influence or alter the acceptability of mesh. Questionnaires have been developed using a 5-point Likert scale to allow quantitative analysis. Qualitative analysis of interviews will be conducted using NVivo software and thematic analysis. Data will be presented using the Journal Article Reporting Standards for mixed-methods research.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been granted by REC Wales (22/PR/0678), and the study is currently in setup. All participants will be required to provide informed consent prior to their participation in the study. We plan to report the results of the study in peer-reviewed scientific and medical journals and via presentations at scientific meetings. Results from this study will aid the design of interventional trials using prophylactic mesh.Trial registration numberNCT05384600.

Project description:ImportanceIncisional hernia is a frequent complication after open abdominal surgery. Prophylactic mesh implantation in the onlay or sublay position requires dissection of the abdominal wall, potentially leading to wound-associated complications.ObjectiveTo compare the incidence of incisional hernia among patients after prophylactic intraperitoneal mesh implantation with that among patients after standard abdominal closure.Design, setting, and participantsAn open-label randomized clinical trial was performed in 169 patients undergoing elective open abdominal surgery from January 1, 2011, to February 29, 2014. Follow-up examinations were performed 1 year and 3 years after surgery. The study was conducted at Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland, a referral center that offers the whole spectrum of abdominal surgical interventions. Patients with 2 or more of the following risk factors were included: overweight or obesity, diagnosis of neoplastic disease, male sex, or history of previous laparotomy. Patients were randomly assigned to prophylactic intraperitoneal mesh implantation or standard abdominal closure. Data were analyzed in August 2017.InterventionsIntraperitoneal implantation of a polypropylene-polyvinylidene fluoride mesh with circumferential fixation.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was the incidence of incisional hernia 3 years after surgery. Secondary end points included mesh-related complications.ResultsAfter the exclusion of 19 patients, 150 patients (81 in the control group and 69 in the mesh group; mean [SD] age, 64.2 [11.1] years; 102 [68.0%] male) were studied. The cumulative incidence of incisional hernia was significantly lower in the mesh group compared with the control group (5 of 69 [7.2%] vs 15 of 81 [18.5%], log-rank test P = .03). Abdominal pain was observed in significantly more patients in the mesh group compared with the control group at 6 weeks (34 of 52 [65%] vs 26 of 59 [44%], P = .04) but not at 12 and 36 months postoperatively. No difference in surgical site infections was observed, but time to complete wound healing of surgical site infection was significantly longer in patients with mesh implantation (median [interquartile range], 8 [6-24] weeks compared with 5 [1-9] weeks; P = .03). Trunk extension was significantly decreased after mesh implantation compared with the control group (mean [SD], 1.73 [0.97] cm vs 2.40 [1.23] cm, P = .009).Conclusions and relevanceIn patients at elevated risk for incisional hernia, prophylactic intraperitoneal mesh implantation reduces the incidence of hernia formation but with increased early postoperative pain and prolonged wound healing of surgical site infection.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01203553.