Dataset Information

Evaluation of a Novel Absorbable Mesh in a Porcine Model of Abdominal Wall Repair.

ABSTRACT: Bioabsorbable meshes have seen increasing clinical use to reinforce soft tissue, and exist on a spectrum of strength loss versus absorption: several retain their strength for months, but remain in situ for years. Others lose strength fully by 6 weeks. An intermediate profile, with some strength for 3 -4 months, but consistent absorption in less than a year, may be an optimal balance of near-term support and long-term safety. In this large animal study, we evaluate such a mesh (DuraSorb, SIA), assessing its utility in a porcine model of abdominal wall repair.

Methods

Two full-thickness defects were created in the abdominal walls of nine Yucatan swine via midline approach and repaired preperitoneally with either DuraSorb or long-lasting control mesh (TIGR, Novus Scientific). At 30 days, 3 months, and 1 year, the implantations were assessed by clinical pathology, post-necropsy histopathology, and burst strength testing.

Results

No device-associated complications were found in vivo, at necropsy, or histologically. DuraSorb was well-integrated and vascularized by 30 days. DuraSorb demonstrated minimal/mild inflammation and fibroplasia, and lower inflammatory scores when compared with TIGR at all time points (P < 0.05). Burst strength of the repair sites was higher than adjacent abdominal wall at all time points (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

DuraSorb provided durable long-term support, minimal inflammation, and consistent absorption in this porcine model of abdominal wall repair, as compared to a long-term control. Clinical data is needed, but these results suggest that this mesh provides adequate structural support while potentially reducing long-term device reactions.

SUBMITTER: Mlodinow AS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8647887 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The objective of this study was to evaluate the mechanical and histological properties of a fully absorbable poly-4-hydroxybutyrate/absorbable barrier composite mesh (Phasix™ ST) compared to partially absorbable (Ventralight™ ST), fully absorbable (Phasix™), and biologically derived (Strattice™) meshes in a porcine model of ventral hernia repair. METHODS:Bilateral abdominal surgical defects were created in twenty-four Yucatan pigs, repaired with intraperitoneal (Phasix™ ST, Ventralight™ ST) or retromuscular (Phasix™, Strattice™) mesh, and evaluated at 12 and 24 weeks (n = 6 mesh/group/time point). RESULTS:Prior to implantation, Strattice™ demonstrated significantly higher (p < 0.001) strength (636.6 ± 192.1 N) compared to Ventralight™ ST (324.3 ± 37.1 N), Phasix™ ST (206.9 ± 11.3 N), and Phasix™ (200.6 ± 25.2 N). At 12 and 24 weeks, mesh/repair strength was significantly greater than NAW (p < 0.01 in all cases), and no significant changes in strength were observed for any meshes between 12 and 24 weeks (p > 0.05). Phasix™ mesh/repair strength was significantly greater than Strattice™ (p < 0.001) at 12 and 24 weeks, and Ventralight™ ST mesh/repair strength was significantly greater than Phasix™ ST mesh (p < 0.05) at 24 weeks. At 12 and 24 weeks, Phasix™ ST and Ventralight™ ST were associated with mild inflammation and minimal-mild fibrosis/neovascularization, with no significant differences between groups. At both time points, Phasix™ was associated with minimal-mild inflammation/fibrosis and mild neovascularization. Strattice™ was associated with minimal inflammation/fibrosis, with minimal neovascularization at 12 weeks, which increased to mild by 24 weeks. Strattice™ exhibited significantly less neovascularization than Phasix™ at 12 weeks and significantly greater inflammation at 24 weeks due to remodeling. CONCLUSIONS:Phasix™ ST demonstrated mechanical and histological properties comparable to partially absorbable (Ventralight™ ST) and fully resorbable (Phasix™) meshes at 12 and 24 weeks in this model. Data also suggest that fully absorbable meshes with longer-term resorption profiles may provide improved mechanical and histological properties compared to biologically derived scaffolds.

Project description:The purpose of this study is to evaluate the histologic response to fibrin sealant (FS) as an alternative fixation method for laparoscopic ventral hernia repair.One non-absorbable barrier mesh (Composix™) and three absorbable barrier meshes (Sepramesh™, Proceed™, and Parietex™ Composite) were used for the study, with uncoated macroporous polypropylene mesh (ProLite Ultra™) as the control. Three methods of fixation were used: #0-polypropylene suture + FS (ARTISS™, Baxter Healthcare Corp.), FS alone (ARTISS™), or tacks alone (n = 10 for each group). Two pieces of mesh (of dimensions 4 × 4-cm) were secured intraperitoneally in 75 New Zealand white rabbits. After 8 weeks, hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained specimens were evaluated for host tissue response. Statistical significance (P < 0.05) was determined using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Fisher's least significant difference (LSD) post hoc test.Composix™ with FS only showed significantly greater cellular infiltration than with suture + FS (P = 0.0007), Proceed™ with FS only had significantly greater neovascularization than with suture + FS (P = 0.0172), and ProLite Ultra™ with suture + FS had significantly greater neovascularization than with tacks only (P = 0.046). Differences due to mesh type showed that Composix™ exhibited less extensive cellular infiltration (P ? 0.0032), extracellular matrix (ECM) deposition, and neovascularization, and demonstrated less inflammatory cells and more fibroblasts compared to the other meshes (P < 0.05).FS did not have a significant histologic effect compared to tacks when utilized for the fixation of mesh to the peritoneum of New Zealand White rabbits. However, the mesh type did have a significant histologic effect. The permanent barrier mesh (Composix™) was associated with less histologic incorporation than absorbable barrier and macroporous meshes, as evidenced by lower levels of cellular infiltration, ECM deposition, and neovascularization, independent of the fixation method used.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Reticular hybrid meshes represent an alternative material for intraperitoneal repair of abdominal hernias. These consist of a reticular mesh coated or interwoven/knitted with inert materials. This study assesses the performance of two reticular polypropylene-containing hybrid meshes, TiMESH (coated with titanium) and DynaMesh (interwoven with polyvinylidene fluoride), in vitro, as well as their efficiency in adhesion prevention and tissue incorporation in an intraperitoneal model. METHODS:The mesothelialization capacity of TiMESH and DynaMesh was evaluated in vitro and compared to that of Surgipro (reticular bare polypropylene) and Preclude (laminar expanded polytetrafluoroethylene). Mesh fragments were placed on the intact parietal peritoneum of New Zealand white rabbits (n = 24), and laparoscopy performed 7 days post-surgery. Fourteen days post-implantation, adhesions were evaluated and host tissue incorporation, macrophage response, collagen expression (immunohistochemistry/RT-PCR) and neoperitoneum formation assessed. Adhesions and omental tissue were also examined. RESULTS:Mesh pores in reticular meshes were devoid of cells in the in vitro study. TiMESH, DynaMesh and Surgipro showed similar adhesion rates at 7/14 days and optimal tissue integration, with significant differences in comparison to Preclude. The greatest presence of macrophages was observed for TiMESH and was significant versus that for Preclude. Hybrid meshes revealed significantly higher collagen 1 mRNA expression in implants, with no differences in the levels of collagen 3. Omental samples from animals with a reticular mesh showed significantly greater collagen 1 mRNA levels. CONCLUSIONS:The reticular structure of a mesh limits the formation of a continuous mesothelial monolayer in vitro, regardless of its composition. The presence of titanium as a coating or polyvinylidene fluoride interwoven with polypropylene in a reticular structure did not prevent adhesions. The hybrid meshes showed proper integration and an increase in the mRNA Col 1 levels in the implant area compared to Surgipro or Preclude.