Comparing the behavior of different polypropylene meshes (heavy and lightweight) in an experimental model of ventral hernia repair
New generation prosthetic biomaterials for abdominal wall repair have been designed to be less dense, by having larger pores than that of the standard polypropylene meshes, to improve abdominal wall compliance. The aim of the present study was to analyze the functional and morphologic properties of...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials Applied biomaterials, 2009-05, Vol.89B (2), p.448-455 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 455 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 448 |
container_title | Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials |
container_volume | 89B |
creator | Bellón, J. M. Rodríguez, M. García-Honduvilla, N. Gómez-Gil, V. Pascual, G. Buján, J. |
description | New generation prosthetic biomaterials for abdominal wall repair have been designed to be less dense, by having larger pores than that of the standard polypropylene meshes, to improve abdominal wall compliance. The aim of the present study was to analyze the functional and morphologic properties of these new meshes. For this purpose, 7 × 5 cm2 defects were created in the anterior abdominal wall of 36 male New Zealand White rabbits and repaired using different polypropylene meshes: a heavyweight mesh (HW), Surgipro, and two lightweight meshes (LW), Parietene and Optilene. Six animals each implanted with biomaterial were sacrificed on postoperative days 14 and 90. Histological and morphometric analysis, adhesion assessment, and biomechanical resistance tests were performed. Similar behavior was shown by the LW and HW meshes in terms of the adhesions and macrophage response induced. After 14 days, the tensile strength of Optilene was greater than the strengths recorded for the other two biomaterials, probably because of its high elasticity. By 90 days, however, the tensile strengths of the three biomaterials were comparable. In conclusion, despite an initial tensile strength advantage shown by the mesh with larger pores, at 90 days postimplant, tensile strengths were similar. Compared with HW, LW prostheses have the benefit that less foreign material was implanted, preserving the elasticity of the recipient host tissue. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater, 2009 |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/jbm.b.31234 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67103594</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>67103594</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4294-a19c5b2cae6c55f4ceb12a68bae4d87cb890c998dfcf56a9596d9b0c93df4f7b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc1v1DAQxSMEoqVw4o58QiCUxY7tJD7SVVmoWhAIhMTFsp1x4-J81M5umyt_OV52W2704o-n3zzNzMuy5wQvCMbF20vdLfSCkoKyB9kh4bzImajJw7t3RQ-yJzFeJrjEnD7ODkhd04oxcZj9Xg7dqILrL9DUAtLQqo0bAhosapy1EKCf0Dj4eQzDOHvoAXUQW4joVQtqMyPVN8i7i3a6hu35Grk-aQhuRgiuS9XKo25owG8tN-kfktBC6J1CAUblwtPskVU-wrP9fZR9f3_ybfkhP_u8-rh8d5YbVgiWKyIM14VRUBrOLTOgSaHKWitgTV0ZXQtshKgbaywvleCibIROEm0ss5WmR9nLnW8a5WoNcZKdiwa8Vz0M6yjLimDKBbsXpIyULG37XrDAqQnBywS-2YEmDDEGsHJMy1FhlgTLbYgyhSi1_Btiol_sbde6g-Yfu08tAWQHXDsP8_-85Onx-a1pvqtxcYKbuxoVfqXBacXlj08r-fP4S7HCX88lo38AZae5oQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>20596956</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparing the behavior of different polypropylene meshes (heavy and lightweight) in an experimental model of ventral hernia repair</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Bellón, J. M. ; Rodríguez, M. ; García-Honduvilla, N. ; Gómez-Gil, V. ; Pascual, G. ; Buján, J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Bellón, J. M. ; Rodríguez, M. ; García-Honduvilla, N. ; Gómez-Gil, V. ; Pascual, G. ; Buján, J.</creatorcontrib><description>New generation prosthetic biomaterials for abdominal wall repair have been designed to be less dense, by having larger pores than that of the standard polypropylene meshes, to improve abdominal wall compliance. The aim of the present study was to analyze the functional and morphologic properties of these new meshes. For this purpose, 7 × 5 cm2 defects were created in the anterior abdominal wall of 36 male New Zealand White rabbits and repaired using different polypropylene meshes: a heavyweight mesh (HW), Surgipro, and two lightweight meshes (LW), Parietene and Optilene. Six animals each implanted with biomaterial were sacrificed on postoperative days 14 and 90. Histological and morphometric analysis, adhesion assessment, and biomechanical resistance tests were performed. Similar behavior was shown by the LW and HW meshes in terms of the adhesions and macrophage response induced. After 14 days, the tensile strength of Optilene was greater than the strengths recorded for the other two biomaterials, probably because of its high elasticity. By 90 days, however, the tensile strengths of the three biomaterials were comparable. In conclusion, despite an initial tensile strength advantage shown by the mesh with larger pores, at 90 days postimplant, tensile strengths were similar. Compared with HW, LW prostheses have the benefit that less foreign material was implanted, preserving the elasticity of the recipient host tissue. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater, 2009</description><identifier>ISSN: 1552-4973</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-4981</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.31234</identifier><identifier>PMID: 18837449</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><subject>Abdominal Wall - pathology ; Abdominal Wall - surgery ; abdominal wall repair ; Animals ; Biocompatible Materials - chemistry ; Biocompatible Materials - metabolism ; biomechanical resistance ; Elasticity ; Herniorrhaphy ; Implants, Experimental ; Macrophages - cytology ; Male ; Materials Testing ; peritoneal adhesions ; peritoneum ; polypropylene ; Polypropylenes - chemistry ; Polypropylenes - metabolism ; Prosthesis Implantation ; Rabbits ; Surgical Mesh ; Tensile Strength ; Tissue Adhesions</subject><ispartof>Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials, 2009-05, Vol.89B (2), p.448-455</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><rights>(c) 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4294-a19c5b2cae6c55f4ceb12a68bae4d87cb890c998dfcf56a9596d9b0c93df4f7b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4294-a19c5b2cae6c55f4ceb12a68bae4d87cb890c998dfcf56a9596d9b0c93df4f7b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fjbm.b.31234$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fjbm.b.31234$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,1412,27905,27906,45555,45556</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18837449$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bellón, J. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rodríguez, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>García-Honduvilla, N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gómez-Gil, V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pascual, G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buján, J.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparing the behavior of different polypropylene meshes (heavy and lightweight) in an experimental model of ventral hernia repair</title><title>Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials</title><addtitle>J. Biomed. Mater. Res</addtitle><description>New generation prosthetic biomaterials for abdominal wall repair have been designed to be less dense, by having larger pores than that of the standard polypropylene meshes, to improve abdominal wall compliance. The aim of the present study was to analyze the functional and morphologic properties of these new meshes. For this purpose, 7 × 5 cm2 defects were created in the anterior abdominal wall of 36 male New Zealand White rabbits and repaired using different polypropylene meshes: a heavyweight mesh (HW), Surgipro, and two lightweight meshes (LW), Parietene and Optilene. Six animals each implanted with biomaterial were sacrificed on postoperative days 14 and 90. Histological and morphometric analysis, adhesion assessment, and biomechanical resistance tests were performed. Similar behavior was shown by the LW and HW meshes in terms of the adhesions and macrophage response induced. After 14 days, the tensile strength of Optilene was greater than the strengths recorded for the other two biomaterials, probably because of its high elasticity. By 90 days, however, the tensile strengths of the three biomaterials were comparable. In conclusion, despite an initial tensile strength advantage shown by the mesh with larger pores, at 90 days postimplant, tensile strengths were similar. Compared with HW, LW prostheses have the benefit that less foreign material was implanted, preserving the elasticity of the recipient host tissue. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater, 2009</description><subject>Abdominal Wall - pathology</subject><subject>Abdominal Wall - surgery</subject><subject>abdominal wall repair</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Biocompatible Materials - chemistry</subject><subject>Biocompatible Materials - metabolism</subject><subject>biomechanical resistance</subject><subject>Elasticity</subject><subject>Herniorrhaphy</subject><subject>Implants, Experimental</subject><subject>Macrophages - cytology</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Materials Testing</subject><subject>peritoneal adhesions</subject><subject>peritoneum</subject><subject>polypropylene</subject><subject>Polypropylenes - chemistry</subject><subject>Polypropylenes - metabolism</subject><subject>Prosthesis Implantation</subject><subject>Rabbits</subject><subject>Surgical Mesh</subject><subject>Tensile Strength</subject><subject>Tissue Adhesions</subject><issn>1552-4973</issn><issn>1552-4981</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkc1v1DAQxSMEoqVw4o58QiCUxY7tJD7SVVmoWhAIhMTFsp1x4-J81M5umyt_OV52W2704o-n3zzNzMuy5wQvCMbF20vdLfSCkoKyB9kh4bzImajJw7t3RQ-yJzFeJrjEnD7ODkhd04oxcZj9Xg7dqILrL9DUAtLQqo0bAhosapy1EKCf0Dj4eQzDOHvoAXUQW4joVQtqMyPVN8i7i3a6hu35Grk-aQhuRgiuS9XKo25owG8tN-kfktBC6J1CAUblwtPskVU-wrP9fZR9f3_ybfkhP_u8-rh8d5YbVgiWKyIM14VRUBrOLTOgSaHKWitgTV0ZXQtshKgbaywvleCibIROEm0ss5WmR9nLnW8a5WoNcZKdiwa8Vz0M6yjLimDKBbsXpIyULG37XrDAqQnBywS-2YEmDDEGsHJMy1FhlgTLbYgyhSi1_Btiol_sbde6g-Yfu08tAWQHXDsP8_-85Onx-a1pvqtxcYKbuxoVfqXBacXlj08r-fP4S7HCX88lo38AZae5oQ</recordid><startdate>200905</startdate><enddate>200905</enddate><creator>Bellón, J. M.</creator><creator>Rodríguez, M.</creator><creator>García-Honduvilla, N.</creator><creator>Gómez-Gil, V.</creator><creator>Pascual, G.</creator><creator>Buján, J.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>8BQ</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200905</creationdate><title>Comparing the behavior of different polypropylene meshes (heavy and lightweight) in an experimental model of ventral hernia repair</title><author>Bellón, J. M. ; Rodríguez, M. ; García-Honduvilla, N. ; Gómez-Gil, V. ; Pascual, G. ; Buján, J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4294-a19c5b2cae6c55f4ceb12a68bae4d87cb890c998dfcf56a9596d9b0c93df4f7b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Abdominal Wall - pathology</topic><topic>Abdominal Wall - surgery</topic><topic>abdominal wall repair</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Biocompatible Materials - chemistry</topic><topic>Biocompatible Materials - metabolism</topic><topic>biomechanical resistance</topic><topic>Elasticity</topic><topic>Herniorrhaphy</topic><topic>Implants, Experimental</topic><topic>Macrophages - cytology</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Materials Testing</topic><topic>peritoneal adhesions</topic><topic>peritoneum</topic><topic>polypropylene</topic><topic>Polypropylenes - chemistry</topic><topic>Polypropylenes - metabolism</topic><topic>Prosthesis Implantation</topic><topic>Rabbits</topic><topic>Surgical Mesh</topic><topic>Tensile Strength</topic><topic>Tissue Adhesions</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bellón, J. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rodríguez, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>García-Honduvilla, N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gómez-Gil, V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pascual, G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buján, J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>METADEX</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology & Engineering</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bellón, J. M.</au><au>Rodríguez, M.</au><au>García-Honduvilla, N.</au><au>Gómez-Gil, V.</au><au>Pascual, G.</au><au>Buján, J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparing the behavior of different polypropylene meshes (heavy and lightweight) in an experimental model of ventral hernia repair</atitle><jtitle>Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials</jtitle><addtitle>J. Biomed. Mater. Res</addtitle><date>2009-05</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>89B</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>448</spage><epage>455</epage><pages>448-455</pages><issn>1552-4973</issn><eissn>1552-4981</eissn><abstract>New generation prosthetic biomaterials for abdominal wall repair have been designed to be less dense, by having larger pores than that of the standard polypropylene meshes, to improve abdominal wall compliance. The aim of the present study was to analyze the functional and morphologic properties of these new meshes. For this purpose, 7 × 5 cm2 defects were created in the anterior abdominal wall of 36 male New Zealand White rabbits and repaired using different polypropylene meshes: a heavyweight mesh (HW), Surgipro, and two lightweight meshes (LW), Parietene and Optilene. Six animals each implanted with biomaterial were sacrificed on postoperative days 14 and 90. Histological and morphometric analysis, adhesion assessment, and biomechanical resistance tests were performed. Similar behavior was shown by the LW and HW meshes in terms of the adhesions and macrophage response induced. After 14 days, the tensile strength of Optilene was greater than the strengths recorded for the other two biomaterials, probably because of its high elasticity. By 90 days, however, the tensile strengths of the three biomaterials were comparable. In conclusion, despite an initial tensile strength advantage shown by the mesh with larger pores, at 90 days postimplant, tensile strengths were similar. Compared with HW, LW prostheses have the benefit that less foreign material was implanted, preserving the elasticity of the recipient host tissue. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater, 2009</abstract><cop>Hoboken</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</pub><pmid>18837449</pmid><doi>10.1002/jbm.b.31234</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1552-4973 |
ispartof | Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials, 2009-05, Vol.89B (2), p.448-455 |
issn | 1552-4973 1552-4981 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67103594 |
source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
subjects | Abdominal Wall - pathology Abdominal Wall - surgery abdominal wall repair Animals Biocompatible Materials - chemistry Biocompatible Materials - metabolism biomechanical resistance Elasticity Herniorrhaphy Implants, Experimental Macrophages - cytology Male Materials Testing peritoneal adhesions peritoneum polypropylene Polypropylenes - chemistry Polypropylenes - metabolism Prosthesis Implantation Rabbits Surgical Mesh Tensile Strength Tissue Adhesions |
title | Comparing the behavior of different polypropylene meshes (heavy and lightweight) in an experimental model of ventral hernia repair |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-18T08%3A44%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparing%20the%20behavior%20of%20different%20polypropylene%20meshes%20(heavy%20and%20lightweight)%20in%20an%20experimental%20model%20of%20ventral%20hernia%20repair&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20biomedical%20materials%20research.%20Part%20B,%20Applied%20biomaterials&rft.au=Bell%C3%B3n,%20J.%20M.&rft.date=2009-05&rft.volume=89B&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=448&rft.epage=455&rft.pages=448-455&rft.issn=1552-4973&rft.eissn=1552-4981&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/jbm.b.31234&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E67103594%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=20596956&rft_id=info:pmid/18837449&rfr_iscdi=true |