Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 10/2013

01-10-2013

Biologic meshes are not superior to synthetic meshes in ventral hernia repair: an experimental study with long-term follow-up evaluation

Authors: M. Ditzel, E. B. Deerenberg, N. Grotenhuis, J. J. Harlaar, K. Monkhorst, Y. M. Bastiaansen-Jenniskens, J. Jeekel, J. F. Lange

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 10/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

In laparoscopic incisional hernia repair, direct contact between the prosthesis and the abdominal viscera is inevitable, which may lead to an inflammatory reaction resulting in abdominal adhesion formation. This study compared five different synthetic and biologic meshes in terms of adhesion formation, shrinkage, incorporation, and histologic characteristics after a period of 30 and 90 days.

Methods

In 85 rats, a mesh was positioned intraperitoneally in direct contact with the viscera. Five different meshes were implanted: Prolene (polypropylene), Parietex composite (collagen-coated polyester), Strattice (porcine dermis, non-cross-linked), Surgisis (porcine small intestine submucosa, non-cross-linked), and Permacol (porcine dermis, cross-linked). The meshes were tested in terms of adhesion formation, shrinkage, and incorporation after a period of 30 and 90 days. Additionally, collagen formation after 90 days was determined.

Results

Significantly less adhesion formation was observed with Parietex composite (5 %; interquartile range [IQR], 2–5 %) and Strattice (5 %; IQR, 4–10 %) in the long term. In contrast, organs were attached to Permacol with four of seven meshes (57 %), and adhesion coverage of Surgisis mesh was present in 66 % (IQR, 0–100 %) of the cases. After 90 days, the best incorporation was seen with the Parietex composite mesh (79 %; IQR, 61–83 %). After 90 days, major alterations in adhesion formation were seen compared with 30 days. Histologically, Strattice and Parietex composite showed a new mesothelial layer on the visceral side of the mesh. Microscopic degradation and new collagen formation were seen in the Surgisis group.

Conclusions

Parietex composite mesh demonstrated the best long-term results compared with all the other meshes. The biologic non-cross-linked mesh, Strattice, showed little adhesion formation and moderate shrinkage but poor incorporation. Biologic meshes are promising, but varying results require a more detailed investigation and demonstrate that biologic meshes are not necessarily superior to synthetic meshes. The significant changes that take place between 30 and 90 days should lead to careful interpretation of short-term experimental results.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Israelsson LA, Jonsson T (1996) Incisional hernia after midline laparotomy: a prospective study. Eur J Surg 162:125–129PubMed Israelsson LA, Jonsson T (1996) Incisional hernia after midline laparotomy: a prospective study. Eur J Surg 162:125–129PubMed
2.
go back to reference Read RC, Yoder G (1989) Recent trends in the management of incisional herniation. Arch Surg 124:485–488PubMedCrossRef Read RC, Yoder G (1989) Recent trends in the management of incisional herniation. Arch Surg 124:485–488PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Bevis PM et al (2010) Randomized clinical trial of mesh versus sutured wound closure after open abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery. Br J Surg 97:1497–1502PubMedCrossRef Bevis PM et al (2010) Randomized clinical trial of mesh versus sutured wound closure after open abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery. Br J Surg 97:1497–1502PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Hoer J et al (2002) Factors influencing the development of incisional hernia: a retrospective study of 2,983 laparotomy patients over a period of 10 years. Chirurg 73:474–480PubMedCrossRef Hoer J et al (2002) Factors influencing the development of incisional hernia: a retrospective study of 2,983 laparotomy patients over a period of 10 years. Chirurg 73:474–480PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Burger JW et al (2004) Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia. Ann Surg 240:578–583 discussion 583–585PubMed Burger JW et al (2004) Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia. Ann Surg 240:578–583 discussion 583–585PubMed
6.
go back to reference Luijendijk RW et al (2000) A comparison of suture repair with mesh repair for incisional hernia. N Engl J Med 343:392–398PubMedCrossRef Luijendijk RW et al (2000) A comparison of suture repair with mesh repair for incisional hernia. N Engl J Med 343:392–398PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Sajid MS et al (2009) Laparoscopic versus open repair of incisional/ventral hernia: a meta-analysis. Am J Surg 197:64–72PubMedCrossRef Sajid MS et al (2009) Laparoscopic versus open repair of incisional/ventral hernia: a meta-analysis. Am J Surg 197:64–72PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Olmi S et al (2007) Laparoscopic versus open incisional hernia repair: an open randomized controlled study. Surg Endosc 21:555–559PubMedCrossRef Olmi S et al (2007) Laparoscopic versus open incisional hernia repair: an open randomized controlled study. Surg Endosc 21:555–559PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Sauerland S et al (2011) Laparoscopic versus open surgical techniques for ventral or incisional hernia repair. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 16(3):CD007781 Sauerland S et al (2011) Laparoscopic versus open surgical techniques for ventral or incisional hernia repair. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 16(3):CD007781
10.
11.
go back to reference Ellis H et al (1999) Adhesion-related hospital readmissions after abdominal and pelvic surgery: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 353:1476–1480PubMedCrossRef Ellis H et al (1999) Adhesion-related hospital readmissions after abdominal and pelvic surgery: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 353:1476–1480PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Stanciu D, Menzies D (2007) The magnitude of adhesion-related problems. Colorectal Dis 9(Suppl 2):35–38PubMedCrossRef Stanciu D, Menzies D (2007) The magnitude of adhesion-related problems. Colorectal Dis 9(Suppl 2):35–38PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Leber GE et al (1998) Long-term complications associated with prosthetic repair of incisional hernias. Arch Surg 133:378–382PubMedCrossRef Leber GE et al (1998) Long-term complications associated with prosthetic repair of incisional hernias. Arch Surg 133:378–382PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Burger JW et al (2006) Evaluation of new prosthetic meshes for ventral hernia repair. Surg Endosc 20:1320–1325PubMedCrossRef Burger JW et al (2006) Evaluation of new prosthetic meshes for ventral hernia repair. Surg Endosc 20:1320–1325PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Halm JA et al (2007) Intraperitoneal polypropylene mesh hernia repair complicates subsequent abdominal surgery. World J Surg 31:423–429 discussion 430PubMedCrossRef Halm JA et al (2007) Intraperitoneal polypropylene mesh hernia repair complicates subsequent abdominal surgery. World J Surg 31:423–429 discussion 430PubMedCrossRef
16.
17.
go back to reference Gaertner WB, Bonsack ME, Delaney JP (2010) Visceral adhesions to hernia prostheses. Hernia 14:375–381PubMedCrossRef Gaertner WB, Bonsack ME, Delaney JP (2010) Visceral adhesions to hernia prostheses. Hernia 14:375–381PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Breuing K et al (2010) Incisional ventral hernias: review of the literature and recommendations regarding the grading and technique of repair. Surgery 148:544–558PubMedCrossRef Breuing K et al (2010) Incisional ventral hernias: review of the literature and recommendations regarding the grading and technique of repair. Surgery 148:544–558PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Bellows CF, Alder A, Helton WS (2006) Abdominal wall reconstruction using biological tissue grafts: present status and future opportunities. Expert Rev Med Devices 3:657–675PubMedCrossRef Bellows CF, Alder A, Helton WS (2006) Abdominal wall reconstruction using biological tissue grafts: present status and future opportunities. Expert Rev Med Devices 3:657–675PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Melman L et al (2011) Early biocompatibility of cross-linked and non-cross-linked biologic meshes in a porcine model of ventral hernia repair. Hernia 15:157–164PubMedCrossRef Melman L et al (2011) Early biocompatibility of cross-linked and non-cross-linked biologic meshes in a porcine model of ventral hernia repair. Hernia 15:157–164PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Duan X, Sheardown H (2005) Crosslinking of collagen with dendrimers. J Biomed Mater Res A 75:510–518PubMed Duan X, Sheardown H (2005) Crosslinking of collagen with dendrimers. J Biomed Mater Res A 75:510–518PubMed
22.
go back to reference Alponat A et al (1997) Prevention of adhesions by Seprafilm, an absorbable adhesion barrier: an incisional hernia model in rats. Am Surg 63:818–819PubMed Alponat A et al (1997) Prevention of adhesions by Seprafilm, an absorbable adhesion barrier: an incisional hernia model in rats. Am Surg 63:818–819PubMed
23.
go back to reference Coleman R (2009) Picrosirius red staining revisited. Acta Histochemica 111:393–470CrossRef Coleman R (2009) Picrosirius red staining revisited. Acta Histochemica 111:393–470CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Baptista ML et al (2000) Abdominal adhesions to prosthetic mesh evaluated by laparoscopy and electron microscopy. J Am Coll Surg 190:271–280PubMedCrossRef Baptista ML et al (2000) Abdominal adhesions to prosthetic mesh evaluated by laparoscopy and electron microscopy. J Am Coll Surg 190:271–280PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Binnebosel M et al (2008) Morphology, quality, and composition in mature human peritoneal adhesions. Langenbecks Arch Surg 393:59–66PubMedCrossRef Binnebosel M et al (2008) Morphology, quality, and composition in mature human peritoneal adhesions. Langenbecks Arch Surg 393:59–66PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Epstein JC et al (2006) Human peritoneal adhesions show evidence of tissue remodeling and markers of angiogenesis. Dis Colon Rectum 49:1885–1892PubMedCrossRef Epstein JC et al (2006) Human peritoneal adhesions show evidence of tissue remodeling and markers of angiogenesis. Dis Colon Rectum 49:1885–1892PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Roy S et al (2004) Reactive oxygen species and EGR-1 gene expression in surgical postoperative peritoneal adhesions. World J Surg 28:316–320PubMedCrossRef Roy S et al (2004) Reactive oxygen species and EGR-1 gene expression in surgical postoperative peritoneal adhesions. World J Surg 28:316–320PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Schreinemacher MH et al (2009) Degradation of mesh coatings and intraperitoneal adhesion formation in an experimental model. Br J Surg 96:305–313PubMedCrossRef Schreinemacher MH et al (2009) Degradation of mesh coatings and intraperitoneal adhesion formation in an experimental model. Br J Surg 96:305–313PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Chelala E et al (2010) Eighty-five redo surgeries after 733 laparoscopic treatments for ventral and incisional hernia: adhesion and recurrence analysis. Hernia 14:123–129PubMedCrossRef Chelala E et al (2010) Eighty-five redo surgeries after 733 laparoscopic treatments for ventral and incisional hernia: adhesion and recurrence analysis. Hernia 14:123–129PubMedCrossRef
30.
go back to reference Zinther NB, Wara P, Friis-Andersen H (2010) Intraperitoneal onlay mesh: an experimental study of adhesion formation in a sheep model. Hernia 14:283–289PubMedCrossRef Zinther NB, Wara P, Friis-Andersen H (2010) Intraperitoneal onlay mesh: an experimental study of adhesion formation in a sheep model. Hernia 14:283–289PubMedCrossRef
31.
go back to reference Petter-Puchner AH et al (2011) Biologic hernia implants in experimental intraperitoneal onlay mesh plasty repair: the impact of proprietary collagen processing methods and fibrin sealant application on tissue integration. Surg Endosc 25:3245–3252PubMedCrossRef Petter-Puchner AH et al (2011) Biologic hernia implants in experimental intraperitoneal onlay mesh plasty repair: the impact of proprietary collagen processing methods and fibrin sealant application on tissue integration. Surg Endosc 25:3245–3252PubMedCrossRef
32.
go back to reference Poulose BK et al (2005) Physiologic properties of small intestine submucosa. J Surg Res 123:262–267PubMedCrossRef Poulose BK et al (2005) Physiologic properties of small intestine submucosa. J Surg Res 123:262–267PubMedCrossRef
33.
go back to reference Clarke KM et al (1996) Intestine submucosa and polypropylene mesh for abdominal wall repair in dogs. J Surg Res 60:107–114PubMedCrossRef Clarke KM et al (1996) Intestine submucosa and polypropylene mesh for abdominal wall repair in dogs. J Surg Res 60:107–114PubMedCrossRef
34.
go back to reference Connor J et al (2009) Retention of structural and biochemical integrity in a biological mesh supports tissue remodeling in a primate abdominal wall model. Regen Med 4:185–195PubMedCrossRef Connor J et al (2009) Retention of structural and biochemical integrity in a biological mesh supports tissue remodeling in a primate abdominal wall model. Regen Med 4:185–195PubMedCrossRef
35.
go back to reference Mulier KE et al (2011) Comparison of Permacol and Strattice for the repair of abdominal wall defects. Hernia 15:315–319PubMedCrossRef Mulier KE et al (2011) Comparison of Permacol and Strattice for the repair of abdominal wall defects. Hernia 15:315–319PubMedCrossRef
36.
go back to reference Gaertner WB, Bonsack ME, Delaney JP (2007) Experimental evaluation of four biologic prostheses for ventral hernia repair. J Gastrointest Surg 11:1275–1285PubMedCrossRef Gaertner WB, Bonsack ME, Delaney JP (2007) Experimental evaluation of four biologic prostheses for ventral hernia repair. J Gastrointest Surg 11:1275–1285PubMedCrossRef
37.
go back to reference Stanwix MG et al (2012) Abdominal ventral hernia repair with current biological prostheses: an experimental large animal model. Ann Plast Surg 66:403–409CrossRef Stanwix MG et al (2012) Abdominal ventral hernia repair with current biological prostheses: an experimental large animal model. Ann Plast Surg 66:403–409CrossRef
38.
go back to reference Schug-Pass C et al (2009) The use of composite meshes in laparoscopic repair of abdominal wall hernias: are there differences in biocompatibily? Experimental results obtained in a laparoscopic porcine model. Surg Endosc 23:487–495PubMedCrossRef Schug-Pass C et al (2009) The use of composite meshes in laparoscopic repair of abdominal wall hernias: are there differences in biocompatibily? Experimental results obtained in a laparoscopic porcine model. Surg Endosc 23:487–495PubMedCrossRef
39.
go back to reference Schug-Pass C et al (2006) A lightweight polypropylene mesh (TiMesh) for laparoscopic intraperitoneal repair of abdominal wall hernias: comparison of biocompatibility with the DualMesh in an experimental study using the porcine model. Surg Endosc 20:402–409PubMedCrossRef Schug-Pass C et al (2006) A lightweight polypropylene mesh (TiMesh) for laparoscopic intraperitoneal repair of abdominal wall hernias: comparison of biocompatibility with the DualMesh in an experimental study using the porcine model. Surg Endosc 20:402–409PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Biologic meshes are not superior to synthetic meshes in ventral hernia repair: an experimental study with long-term follow-up evaluation
Authors
M. Ditzel
E. B. Deerenberg
N. Grotenhuis
J. J. Harlaar
K. Monkhorst
Y. M. Bastiaansen-Jenniskens
J. Jeekel
J. F. Lange
Publication date
01-10-2013
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 10/2013
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-2939-y

Other articles of this Issue 10/2013

Surgical Endoscopy 10/2013 Go to the issue