Top

Hernia

Published in:

01-08-2008 | Original Article

Abdominal wall hernia repair: a comparison of Permacol^® and Surgisis^® grafts in a rat hernia model

Authors: F. S. Ayubi, P. J. Armstrong, M. S. Mattia, D. M. Parker

Published in: Hernia | Issue 4/2008

Abstract

Background

This study compared two porcine-derived grafts Permacol (Tissue Science Laboratory, Covington, GA, USA) and Surgisis (Cook Surgical, Bloomington, IN, USA) in terms of strength of incorporation (SOI), incorporation of host tissue, and adhesion formation using a rat model.

Methods

A prospective randomized study using 48 Sprague–Dawley rats. A standardized 1.5 × 5 cm fascial defect was created and repaired with either Permacol or Surgisis grafts. The rats were then sacrificed at 3, 14, 28, or 60 days. The specimens were examined for SOI, neovascularization, collagen deposition, collagen organization, and adhesion formation.

Results

Surgisis had significantly greater SOI than Permacol at 28 (0.115 vs. 0.0754 Mpa) and 60 days (0.131 vs. 0.635 Mpa). Surgisis had significantly more collagen deposition and neovascularization than Permacol at 60 days. The area of adhesions was not significantly different between Surgisis and Permacol.

Conclusion

Surgisis is superior to Permacol in terms of SOI and tissue ingrowth at 60 days. Furthermore, Surgisis strengthened over time whereas Permacol decreased in strength.

Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, van den Tol MP, de Lange DC, Braaksma MM, IJzermans JN, Boelhouwer RU, de Vries BC, Salu MK, Wereldsma JC, Bruijninckx CM, Jeekel J (2000) A comparison of suture repair with mesh repair for incisional hernia. N Engl J Med 343:392–398PubMedCrossRef

Burger JW, Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, Halm JA, Verdaasdonk EG, Jeekel J (2004) Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia. Ann Surg 240:578–585PubMed

Leber GE, Garb JL, Alexander AI, Reed WP (1998) Long-term complications associated with prosthetic repair of incisional hernias. Arch Surg 133:378–382PubMedCrossRef

Iannitti DA, Hope WW, Norton HJ, Lincourt AE, Millikan K, Fenoglio ME, Moskowitz M (2008) Technique and outcomes of abdominal incisional hernia repair using a synthetic composite mesh: a report of 455 cases. J Am Coll Surg 206:83–88PubMedCrossRef

Mahmoud Uslu HY, Erkek AB, Cakmak A, Sozener U, Soylu L, Turkcapar AG, Kuterdem E (2006) Incisional hernia treatment with polypropylene graft: results of 10 years. Hernia 10:380–384PubMedCrossRef

Szczerba SR, Dumanian GA (2003) Definitive surgical treatment of infected or exposed ventral hernia mesh. Ann Surg 237:437–41PubMedCrossRef

Voyles CR, Richardson JD, Bland KI, Tobin GR, Flint LM, Polk HC Jr (1981) Emergency abdominal wall reconstruction with polypropylene mesh: short-term benefits versus long-term complications. Ann Surg 194:219–223PubMedCrossRef

Jones JW, Jurkovich GJ (1989) Polypropylene mesh closure of infected abdominal wounds. Am Surg 55:73–66PubMed

Campenelli G, Nicolosi FM, Pettinari D, Contessini Avesani E (2004) Prosthetic repair, intestinal resection, and potentially contaminated areas: safe and feasible?. Hernia 8:190–192

10.

Parker DM, Armstrong PJ, Frizzi JD, North JH Jr (2006) Porcine dermal collagen (Permacol) for abdominal wall reconstruction. Curr Surg 63:255–258PubMedCrossRef

11.

Franklin ME Jr, Gonzalez JJ Jr, Glass JL (2004) Use of porcine small intestinal submucosa as a prosthetic device for laparoscopic repair of hernias in contaminated fields: 2-year follow-up. Hernia 8:186–189PubMed

12.

Ueno T, Pickett LC, de la Fuente SG, Lawson DC, Pappas TN (2004) Clinical application of porcine small intestinal submucosa in the management of infected or potentially contaminated abdominal defects. J Gastrointest Surg 8:109–112PubMedCrossRef

13.

Helton WS, Fisichella PM, Berger R, Horgan S, Espat NJ, Abcarian H (2005) Short-term outcomes with small intestinal submucosa for ventral abdominal hernia. Arch Surg 140:549–560PubMedCrossRef

14.

Catena F, Ansaloni L, Gazzotti F, Gagliardi S, Di Saverio S, D’Alessandro L, Pinna AD (2007) Use of porcine dermal collagen graft (Permacol) for hernia repair in contaminated fields. Hernia 11:57–60PubMedCrossRef

15.

Voytik-Harbin SL, Brightman AO, Kraine MR, Waisner B, Badylak SF (1997) Identification of extractable growth factors from small intestinal submucosa. J Cell Biochem 67:478–491PubMedCrossRef

16.

Pu LL (2005) Small intestinal submucosa (Surgisis) as a bioactive prosthetic material for repair of abdominal wall fascial defect. Plast Reconstr Surg 115:2127–2131PubMedCrossRef

17.

Konstantinovic ML, Lagae P, Zheng F, Verbeken EK, De RD, Deprest JA (2005) Comparison of host response to polypropylene and non-cross-linked porcine small intestine serosal-derived collagen implants in a rat model. BJOG 112:1554–1560PubMedCrossRef

18.

Soiderer EE, Lantz GC, Kazacos EA, Hodde JP, Wiegand RE (2004) Morphologic study of three collagen materials for body wall repair. J Surg Res 118:161–175PubMedCrossRef

19.

Ko R, Kazacos EA, Snyder S, Ernst DM, Lantz GC (2006) Tensile strength comparison of small intestinal submucosa body wall repair. J Surg Res 135:9–17PubMedCrossRef

20.

Zhang F, Zhang J, Lin S, Oswald T, Sones W, Cai Z, Dorsett-Martin W, Lineaweaver WC (2003) Small intestinal submucosa in abdominal wall repair after TRAM flap harvesting in a rat model. Plast Reconstr Surg 112:565–570PubMedCrossRef

21.

Macleod TM, Williams G, Sanders R, Green CJ (2003) Prefabricated skin flaps in a rat model based on a dermal replacement matrix Permacol. Br J Plast Surg 56:775–783PubMedCrossRef

22.

Macleod TM, Williams G, Sanders R, Green CJ (2005) Histological evaluation of Permacol as a subcutaneous implant over a 20-week period in the rat model. Br J Plast Surg 58:518–532PubMedCrossRef

23.

Judge TW, Parker DM, Dinsmore RC (2007) Abdominal wall hernia repair: a comparison of sepramesh and parietex composite mesh in a rabbit hernia model. J Am Coll Surg 204:276–281PubMedCrossRef

24.

Klinge U, Conze J, Klosterhalfen B, Limberg W, Obolenski B, Ottinger AP, Schumpelick V (1996) Changes in abdominal wall mechanics after mesh implantation. Experimental changes in mesh stability. Langenbecks Arch Chir 381:323–332PubMedCrossRef

Title: Abdominal wall hernia repair: a comparison of Permacol® and Surgisis® grafts in a rat hernia model
Authors: F. S. Ayubi
P. J. Armstrong
M. S. Mattia
D. M. Parker
Publication date: 01-08-2008
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: Hernia / Issue 4/2008
Print ISSN: 1265-4906
Electronic ISSN: 1248-9204
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-008-0359-z

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abdominal wall hernia repair: a comparison of Permacol^® and Surgisis^® grafts in a rat hernia model

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 4/2008

Consequences of endoscopic inguinal hernioplasty with mesh on subsequent open radical prostatectomy

A cost-effective mesh design for extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair using lightweight mesh

Bowel complications after prolene hernia system (PHS) repair: a case report and review of the literature

Blood vessel matrix: a new alternative for abdominal wall reconstruction

Long-term discomfort after plug and patch hernioplasty

Lower gastrointestinal bleeding: an unusual manifestation of inguinal hernia