Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
International Urogynecology Journal
Published in: International Urogynecology Journal 8/2022

Open Access 21-03-2022 | Stress Incontinence | Original Article

Development and in vitro investigation of a biodegradable mesh for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence

Published in: International Urogynecology Journal | Issue 8/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

The use of polypropylene (PP) mesh for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) surgery has declined because of safety concerns. The aim of this study is to evaluate a biodegradable polycaprolactone (PCL) mesh and a PCL composite mesh tissue engineered with human uterine fibroblasts (HUFs) for SUI surgery by comparing mechanical properties and in vitro biocompatibility to commercially available PP and porcine dermis (PD).

Methods

The mechanical properties of four scaffold materials were evaluated: PCL, PCL-collagen-hyaluronic acid composite, acellular porcine dermal collagen (PD) (Pelvicol™) and polypropylene (Gynecare TVT™ Exact®). HUFs were seeded on separate scaffolds. After 7 and 14 days scaffolds were assessed for metabolic activity and cell proliferation using Alamar Blue, Live/Dead and PicoGreen assays. Soluble collagen production was evaluated using a Sircol assay.

Results

PCL and the composite scaffold reached ultimate tensile strength (UTS) values closest to healthy pelvic floor tissue (PCL = 1.19 MPa; composite = 1.13 MPa; pelvic floor = 0.79 MPa; Lei et al. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 18(6):603-7, 2007). Cells on PCL showed significantly greater cell viability than PP at day 7 (p < 0.0001). At D14 the composite scaffold showed significantly greater cell viability than PP (p = 0.0006). PCL was the best performing scaffold for soluble collagen production at day 14 (106.1 μg versus 13.04 μg for PP, p = 0.0173).

Conclusions

We have designed a biodegradable PCL mesh and a composite mesh which demonstrate better biocompatibility than PP and mechanical properties closer to that of healthy pelvic floor tissue. This in vitro study provides promising evidence that these two implants should be evaluated in animal and human trials.
Literature
1.
Abrams P, et al. The standardisation of terminology in lower urinary tract function: report from the standardisation sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Urology. 2003;61(1):37–49.CrossRef
2.
Burkhard FC, et al. EAU Guidelines on Urinary Incontinence in Adults 2018, in European Association of Urology Guidelines. 2018 Edition. The Netherlands: European Association of Urology Guidelines Office: Arnhem; 2018.
3.
Gibson W, Wagg A. Are older women more likely to receive surgical treatment for stress urinary incontinence since the introduction of the mid-urethral sling? An examination of Hospital Episode Statistics data. Bjog. 2016;123(8):1386–92.CrossRef
4.
Heneghan CJ, et al. Trials of transvaginal mesh devices for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic database review of the US FDA approval process. BMJ Open. 2017;7(12):e017125.CrossRef
5.
MacCraith E, et al. Comparison of synthetic mesh erosion and chronic pain rates after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence: a systematic review. Int Urogynecol J. 2021;32(3):573–80.CrossRef
6.
Mathieson R, et al. Stress urinary incontinence in the mesh complication era: current Australian trends. BJU Int. 2020. 128: 95-102.
7.
Shafaat S, et al. Demonstration of improved tissue integration and angiogenesis with an elastic, estradiol releasing polyurethane material designed for use in pelvic floor repair. Neurourol Urodyn. 2018;37(2):716–25.CrossRef
8.
Faulk DM, et al. ECM hydrogel coating mitigates the chronic inflammatory response to polypropylene mesh. Biomaterials. 2014;35(30):8585–95.CrossRef
9.
Nolfi AL, et al. Host response to synthetic mesh in women with mesh complications. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215(2):206.e1–8.CrossRef
10.
Manodoro S, et al. Graft-related complications and biaxial tensiometry following experimental vaginal implantation of flat mesh of variable dimensions. Bjog. 2013;120(2):244–50.CrossRef
11.
MacCraith E, O'Brien FJ, Davis NF. Biodegradable materials for surgical management of stress urinary incontinence: A narrative review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2021;259:153–60.CrossRef
12.
Felfel RM, et al. In vitro degradation and mechanical properties of PLA-PCL copolymer unit cell scaffolds generated by two-photon polymerization. Biomed Mater. 2016;11(1):015011.CrossRef
13.
Labet M, Thielemans W. Synthesis of polycaprolactone: a review. Chem Soc Rev. 2009;38(12):3484–504.CrossRef
14.
Chang SH, et al. Fast Degradable Polycaprolactone for Drug Delivery. Biomacromolecules. 2018;19(6):2302–7.CrossRef
15.
Middleton JC, Tipton AJ. Synthetic biodegradable polymers as orthopedic devices. Biomaterials. 2000;21(23):2335–46.CrossRef
16.
Keltie K, et al. Complications following vaginal mesh procedures for stress urinary incontinence: an 8 year study of 92,246 women. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):12015.CrossRef
17.
Ulrich D, et al. Human endometrial mesenchymal stem cells modulate the tissue response and mechanical behavior of polyamide mesh implants for pelvic organ prolapse repair. Tissue Eng Part A. 2014;20(3-4):785–98.PubMed
18.
Abdel-Fattah M, Barrington JW, Arunkalaivanan AS. Pelvicol pubovaginal sling versus tension-free vaginal tape for treatment of urodynamic stress incontinence: a prospective randomized three-year follow-up study. Eur Urol. 2004;46(5):629–35.CrossRef
19.
20.
MacCraith E, et al. Mechanical characterization of a biodegradable mesh for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Int J Urol. 2021;28(2):243–5.CrossRef
21.
Gouveia PJ, et al. Development of collagen-poly(caprolactone)-based core-shell scaffolds supplemented with proteoglycans and glycosaminoglycans for ligament repair. Mater Sci Eng: C. 2020;111657.
22.
Davis NF, et al. Evaluation of xenogenic extracellular matrices as adjuvant scaffolds for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(12):2105–10.CrossRef
23.
Lei L, Song Y, Chen R. Biomechanical properties of prolapsed vaginal tissue in pre- and postmenopausal women. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2007;18(6):603–7.CrossRef
24.
Hympanova L, et al. Physiologic musculofascial compliance following reinforcement with electrospun polycaprolactone-ureidopyrimidinone mesh in a rat model. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2017;74:349–57.CrossRef
25.
Paul K, et al. 3D bioprinted endometrial stem cells on melt electrospun poly ε-caprolactone mesh for pelvic floor application promote anti-inflammatory responses in mice. Acta Biomater. 2019;97:162–76.CrossRef
26.
Mangera A, et al. Comparison of candidate scaffolds for tissue engineering for stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse repair. BJU Int. 2013;112(5):674–85.CrossRef
27.
Hung MJ, et al. Fascia tissue engineering with human adipose-derived stem cells in a murine model: Implications for pelvic floor reconstruction. J Formos Med Assoc. 2014;113(10):704–15.CrossRef
28.
Mangera A, et al. Are biomechanical properties predictive of the success of prostheses used in stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse? A systematic review. Neurourol Urodynam. 2012;31(1):13–21.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Development and in vitro investigation of a biodegradable mesh for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence
Publication date
21-03-2022
Published in
International Urogynecology Journal / Issue 8/2022
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Electronic ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-022-05160-2

Other articles of this Issue 8/2022

International Urogynecology Journal 8/2022 Go to the issue

Original Article

Predictors of postoperative complications from stress urinary incontinence procedures: a NSQIP database study

Review Article

Associations between metabolic syndrome and female stress urinary incontinence: a meta-analysis

Original Article

Correlation between symptoms and imaging findings including pelvic floor ultrasound to improve the symptom-based diagnosis of female urethral diverticulum (CHECK-UD study)

Original Article

Treatment with platelet-rich plasma attenuates proprioceptor abnormalities in a rat model of postpartum stress urinary incontinence

Original Article

Mechanical stress influences the morphology and function of human uterosacral ligament fibroblasts and activates the p38 MAPK pathway

Original Article

Effect of electroacupuncture on the degradation of collagen in pelvic floor supporting tissue of stress urinary incontinence rats