Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 6/2015

01-06-2015

Evaluation of absorbable mesh fixation devices at various deployment angles

Authors: Ahmed M. Zihni, Jaime A. Cavallo, Dominic M. Thompson Jr., Nabeel H. Chowdhury, Margaret M. Frisella, Brent D. Matthews, Corey R. Deeken

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 6/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Hernia repair failure may occur due to suboptimal mesh fixation by mechanical constructs before mesh integration. Construct design and acute penetration angle may alter mesh-tissue fixation strength. We compared acute fixation strengths of absorbable fixation devices at various deployment angles, directions of loading, and construct orientations.

Methods

Porcine abdominal walls were sectioned. Constructs were deployed at 30°, 45°, 60°, and 90° angles to fix mesh to the tissue specimens. Lap-shear testing was performed in upward, downward, and lateral directions in relation to the abdominal wall cranial–caudal axis to evaluate fixation. Absorbatack™ (AT), SorbaFix™ (SF), and SecureStrap™ in vertical (SSV) and horizontal (SSH) orientations in relation to the abdominal wall cranial–caudal axis were tested. Ten tests were performed for each combination of device, angle, and loading direction. Failure types and strength data were recorded. ANOVA with Tukey–Kramer adjustments for multiple comparisons and χ 2 tests were performed as appropriate (p < 0.05 considered significant).

Results

At 30°, SSH and SSV had greater fixation strengths (12.95, 12.98 N, respectively) than SF (5.70 N; p = 0.0057, p = 0.0053, respectively). At 45°, mean fixation strength of SSH was significantly greater than SF (18.14, 11.40 N; p = 0.0002). No differences in strength were identified at 60° or 90°. No differences in strength were noted between SSV and SSH with different directions of loading. No differences were noted between SS and AT at any angle. Immediate failure was associated with SF (p < 0.0001) and the 30° tacking angle (p < 0.01).

Conclusions

Mesh-tissue fixation was stronger at acute deployment angles with SS compared to SF constructs. The 30° angle and the SF device were associated with increased immediate failures. Varying construct and loading direction did not generate statistically significant differences in the fixation strength of absorbable fixation devices in this study.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Turner, P.L., A.E. Park (2008) Laparoscopic repair of ventral incisional hernias: pros and cons. Surg Clin North Am 88(1):85–100, viii Turner, P.L., A.E. Park (2008) Laparoscopic repair of ventral incisional hernias: pros and cons. Surg Clin North Am 88(1):85–100, viii
2.
go back to reference Stoikes, N., G.R. Voeller new developments in hernia repair: a 2013 update. Surg Technol Int XXIII Stoikes, N., G.R. Voeller new developments in hernia repair: a 2013 update. Surg Technol Int XXIII
3.
go back to reference Sanchez LJ, Bencini L, Moretti R (2004) Recurrences after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: results and critical review. Hernia 8(2):138–143CrossRefPubMed Sanchez LJ, Bencini L, Moretti R (2004) Recurrences after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: results and critical review. Hernia 8(2):138–143CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Pierce RA et al (2007) Pooled data analysis of laparoscopic vs. open ventral hernia repair: 14 years of patient data accrual. Surg Endosc 21(3):378–386CrossRefPubMed Pierce RA et al (2007) Pooled data analysis of laparoscopic vs. open ventral hernia repair: 14 years of patient data accrual. Surg Endosc 21(3):378–386CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Ramshaw B.J. et al. (1999) Comparison of laparoscopic and open ventral herniorrhaphy. Am Surg 65(9):827–31; discussion 831–2 Ramshaw B.J. et al. (1999) Comparison of laparoscopic and open ventral herniorrhaphy. Am Surg 65(9):827–31; discussion 831–2
6.
7.
go back to reference Awad ZT et al (2005) Mechanisms of ventral hernia recurrence after mesh repair and a new proposed classification. J Am Coll Surg 201(1):132–140CrossRefPubMed Awad ZT et al (2005) Mechanisms of ventral hernia recurrence after mesh repair and a new proposed classification. J Am Coll Surg 201(1):132–140CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Sadava EE et al (2013) Laparoscopic mechanical fixation devices: does firing angle matter? Surg Endosc 27(6):2076–2081CrossRefPubMed Sadava EE et al (2013) Laparoscopic mechanical fixation devices: does firing angle matter? Surg Endosc 27(6):2076–2081CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Cardinale M.e.a. (2011) Comparison of Acute Holding Strength of an Absorbable Strap Fixation Device in Porcine Flank at Various Implantation Angles. (Report No. SEC-339-11-8/13). Ethicon. PDF File Cardinale M.e.a. (2011) Comparison of Acute Holding Strength of an Absorbable Strap Fixation Device in Porcine Flank at Various Implantation Angles. (Report No. SEC-339-11-8/13). Ethicon. PDF File
11.
go back to reference Carbonell A.M. et al. (2003) Local injection for the treatment of suture site pain after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. Am Surg 69(8):688–91; discussion 691–2 Carbonell A.M. et al. (2003) Local injection for the treatment of suture site pain after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. Am Surg 69(8):688–91; discussion 691–2
12.
go back to reference Asencio F et al (2009) Open randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open incisional hernia repair. Surg Endosc 23(7):1441–1448CrossRefPubMed Asencio F et al (2009) Open randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open incisional hernia repair. Surg Endosc 23(7):1441–1448CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Carbajo MA et al (1999) Laparoscopic treatment vs open surgery in the solution of major incisional and abdominal wall hernias with mesh. Surg Endosc 13(3):250–252CrossRefPubMed Carbajo MA et al (1999) Laparoscopic treatment vs open surgery in the solution of major incisional and abdominal wall hernias with mesh. Surg Endosc 13(3):250–252CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Eriksen JR et al (2009) Pain, quality of life and recovery after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. Hernia 13(1):13–21CrossRefPubMed Eriksen JR et al (2009) Pain, quality of life and recovery after laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. Hernia 13(1):13–21CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Byrd JF et al (2011) Evaluation of absorbable and permanent mesh fixation devices: adhesion formation and mechanical strength. Hernia 15(5):553–558CrossRefPubMed Byrd JF et al (2011) Evaluation of absorbable and permanent mesh fixation devices: adhesion formation and mechanical strength. Hernia 15(5):553–558CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Hollinsky C et al (2010) Tensile strength and adhesion formation of mesh fixation systems used in laparoscopic incisional hernia repair. Surg Endosc 24(6):1318–1324CrossRefPubMed Hollinsky C et al (2010) Tensile strength and adhesion formation of mesh fixation systems used in laparoscopic incisional hernia repair. Surg Endosc 24(6):1318–1324CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Reynvoet E et al (2012) Tensile strength testing for resorbable mesh fixation systems in laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. Surg Endosc 26(9):2513–2520CrossRefPubMed Reynvoet E et al (2012) Tensile strength testing for resorbable mesh fixation systems in laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. Surg Endosc 26(9):2513–2520CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Melman L et al (2010) Evaluation of acute fixation strength for mechanical tacking devices and fibrin sealant versus polypropylene suture for laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. Surg Innov 17(4):285–290CrossRefPubMed Melman L et al (2010) Evaluation of acute fixation strength for mechanical tacking devices and fibrin sealant versus polypropylene suture for laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. Surg Innov 17(4):285–290CrossRefPubMed
19.
Metadata
Title
Evaluation of absorbable mesh fixation devices at various deployment angles
Authors
Ahmed M. Zihni
Jaime A. Cavallo
Dominic M. Thompson Jr.
Nabeel H. Chowdhury
Margaret M. Frisella
Brent D. Matthews
Corey R. Deeken
Publication date
01-06-2015
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 6/2015
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3850-x

Other articles of this Issue 6/2015

Surgical Endoscopy 6/2015 Go to the issue