In vitro characterization of a fluoropassivated gelatin-impregnated polyester mesh for hernia repair

[Safety of mesh with fluoropolymer coating during intra-abdominal placement in large animals: results of the pilot study]

OBJECTIVE

When performing laparoscopic intraperitoneal hernioplasty (IPOM), endoprostheses made of fluoropolymers are often used. However, there is no data in the literature on the intra-abdominal use of inexpensive polyester prostheses with a fluoropolymer coating compared to composite implants. Thus, the aim of the pilot study was a preliminary assessment of the safety profile of FTOREX mesh endoprostheses during intra-abdominal placement in large animals.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

6 endoprostheses were installed laparoscopically intraperitoneally in each of the 3 pigs: 1) FTOREX; 2) FTOREX with a layer of carboxymethylcellulose; 3) REPEREN-16-2; 4) SYMBOTEX; 5) VENTRALIGHT ST; 6) decellularized pork peritoneum. Fixation was performed with a herniator, transfascial sutures were not used. Relaparoscopy was performed after 45 days, and withdrawal from the experiment was performed after 90 days. Performance characteristics, signs of deformation and retraction, parameters of spike formation were evaluated.

RESULTS

All the animals survived, no complications were observed. There were no clinical manifestations or behavioral reactions indicating the presence of adhesions. The most convenient to use were the SYMBOTEX and FTOREX implants (5.0 points each). By the end of the experiment, deformation and retraction were noted in both variants of the FTOREX implants and the REPEREN prosthesis. These changes were completely absent only when using the SYMBOTEX endoprosthesis. According to the number of implants with adhesions, by the end of the observation, both variants of FTOREX prostheses occupied an intermediate position between the Reference (the worst indicator) and VENTRALIGHT ST (the best indicator). However, both FTOREX endoprostheses showed the best performance among all implants in the integral assessment of adhesions, as well as in terms of parameters such as the area and appearance of adhesions, and in terms of the strength of the joints, they were second only to the VENTRALIGHT ST endoprosthesis (0.67 vs. 0.5 points). During the study, there was no reliable dependence of deformation, retraction and adhesion formation indicators on the type of implant.

CONCLUSION

The results of the pilot study showed that all the implants used did not cause any clinically significant adverse reactions or complications. FTOREX endoprostheses with their intraperitoneal installation have anti-adhesive properties that are not inferior to VENTRALIGHT ST or SYMBOTEX composite implants. However, having less rigidity, they are more often deformed and subjected to retraction.

Use of an experimental model to evaluate infection resistance of meshes in abdominal wall surgery

BACKGROUND

Staphylococcal species are the most common organisms causing prosthetic mesh infections, however, infections due to rapidly growing mycobacteria are increasing. This study evaluates the resistance of biomaterial for abdominal wall prostheses against the development of postoperative infection in a rat model.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In 75 rats, we intramuscularly implanted three different types of prostheses: (1) low-density polypropylene monofilament mesh (PMM), (2) high-density PMM, and (3) a composite prosthesis composed of low-density PMM and a nonporous hydrophilic film. Meshes were inoculated with a suspension containing 10⁸ colony-forming units of Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Mycobacterium fortuitum, or Mycobacterium abscessus before wound closure. Animals were sacrificed on the eighth day postoperatively for clinical evaluation, and the implants were removed for bacteriologic analyses.

RESULTS

Prostheses infected with S aureus showed a higher bacterial viability, worse integration, and clinical outcome compared with infection by other bacteria. Composite prostheses showed a higher number of viable colonies of both M fortuitum and Staphylococcus spp., with poorer integration in host tissue. However, when the composite prosthesis was infected with M abscessus, a lower number of viable bacteria were isolated and a better integration was observed compared with infection by other bacteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering M abscessus, a smaller collagen-free contact surface shows better resistance to infection, however, depending on the type of bacteria, prostheses with a large surface, and covered with collagen shows reduced resistance to infection, worse integration, and worse clinical outcome.

Bacterial adherence to different meshes used in abdominal surgery

BACKGROUND

We studied the influence of morphology and type of material of abdominal wall prostheses in the avoidance of bacterial adhesion in acute and chronic mesh infections.

METHODS

Three different types of prostheses were compared: 1) High-density polypropylene monofilament mesh (PMM); 2) low-density PMM; and 3) prostheses composed of low-density polypropylene and a non-porous hydrophilic film (composite prostheses). Microbial adhesion tests were performed using reference strains of Staphylococcus aureus 15981, Staphylococcus epidermidis ATCC 35984, Mycobacterium abscessus DSM 44196, and Mycobacterium fortuitum ATCC 13756 using a protocol described previously.

RESULTS

Both Staphylococcus spp. and M. fortuitum strains showed lower adherence to PMM. Mycobacterium abscessus also exhibited lower adherence to composite prostheses. Both Mycobacterium spp. strains had lower adherence than Staphylococcus spp. strains for all materials except for low-density PMM. Mycobacterium fortuitum showed higher adherence to composite prostheses than M. abscessus, whereas the latter species had higher adherence to high-density PMM than M. fortuitum.

CONCLUSION

Depending on the type of bacteria, collagen-coated hydrophilic prostheses with a large surface increased bacterial adherence significantly. These differences should be taken into consideration when choosing a mesh graft, which limits infection in abdominal wall reconstruction.

Physicomechanical evaluation of polypropylene, polyester, and polytetrafluoroethylene meshes for inguinal hernia repair

BACKGROUND

For meshes to be used effectively for hernia repair, it is imperative that engineers and surgeons standardize the terminology and techniques related to physicomechanical evaluation of these materials. The objectives of this study were to propose standard techniques, perform physicomechanical testing, and classify materials commonly used for inguinal hernia repair.

STUDY DESIGN

Nine meshes were evaluated: 4 polypropylene, 1 polyester, 1 polytetrafluoroethylene, and 3 partially absorbable. Physical properties were determined through image analysis, laser micrometry, and density measurements. Biomechanical properties were determined through suture retention, tear resistance, uniaxial, and ball burst testing with specimens tested in 2 different orientations. A 1-way ANOVA with Tukey's post-test or a t-test were performed, with p < 0.05.

RESULTS

Significant differences were observed due to both mesh type and orientation. Areas of interstices ranged from 0.33 ± 0.01 mm² for ProLite (Atrium Medical Corp) and C-QUR Lite (Atrium Medical Corp) Large to 4.10 ± 0.06 mm² for ULTRAPRO (Ethicon), and filament diameters ranged from 99.00 ±8.1 μm for ProLite Ultra (Atrium Medical Corp) and C-QUR Lite Small to 338.8 ± 3.7 μm for Parietex Flat Sheet TEC (Covidien). These structural characteristics influenced biomechanical properties such as tear resistance and tensile strength. ProLite Ultra, C-QUR Lite Small, ULTRAPRO and INFINIT (WL Gore & Associates) did not resist tearing as effectively as the others. All meshes exhibited supraphysiologic burst strengths except INFINIT and ULTRAPRO.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant differences exist between the physicomechanical properties of polypropylene, polyester, polytetrafluoroethylene, and partially absorbable mesh prostheses commonly used for inguinal hernia repair. Orientation of the mesh was also shown to be critical for the success of meshes, particularly those demonstrating anisotropy.

Physicomechanical evaluation of absorbable and nonabsorbable barrier composite meshes for laparoscopic ventral hernia repair

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare the physicomechanical properties of composite prostheses for laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) through standard testing and a proposed classification system.

METHODS

Seven prostheses (four with absorbable barriers and 3 with nonabsorbable barriers) were evaluated. The barrier layer was removed, after which the area of the interstices and the diameter of the filaments were determined. The barrier layer was left intact during thickness, density, suture retention strength, tear resistance, uniaxial tensile, and ball-burst testing. Specimens were oriented parallel or perpendicular to their longest dimension during testing. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey's posttest or an unpaired, two-tailed t-test was performed to determine whether differences existed due to mesh or orientation, and a p value<0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Significant differences were observed between mesh types and due to the orientation of the mesh during testing. Of the absorbable barrier meshes, Bard Sepramesh IP Composite demonstrated the greatest suture retention and tear strengths, followed by C-QUR mesh. Of the permanent barrier meshes, DUALMESH demonstrated the greatest suture retention strength in the perpendicular direction, followed by Bard Composix E/X. DUALMESH and Bard Composix E/X demonstrated equivalent suture retention strength in the parallel direction and equivalent tear resistance in both testing directions. All meshes demonstrated tensile strengths greater than the physiologically relevant range of 16-32 N/cm.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provided a basic understanding of how the structural aspects of each mesh design influence functionality. Differences between composite barrier prostheses commonly used for LVHR were observed due to barrier type, mesh type, and orientation. A set of standard testing techniques and a classification system also were presented to define fully the properties of these materials.

The application of mesh support in periareolar breast surgery: clinical and mammographic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Numerous techniques have been described for the treatment of breast hypertrophy and ptosis. Unfortunately, recurrent ptosis after mammaplasty can occur regardless of the technique used. To avoid this problem, different kinds of supporting devices have been described with variable rates of success. However, the true implications of incorporating prosthetic materials into breast surgery have never been clarified. Therefore, surgeons have traditionally been reluctant to apply any kind of prosthetic material to the breast, fearing inflammation, an unfavorable aesthetic outcome, palpable or visible deformities, and interference with the mammographic evaluation of breast cancer. This study analyzed the aesthetic, clinical, and mammographic implications of using mesh as a supportive device in periareolar breast surgery.

METHODS

For this study, 18 patients (mean age, 42 years) with breast hypertrophy, ptosis, or both were managed with the double-skin periareolar mammaplasty technique, with placement of mixed (60% Polyglactine and 40% polyester) mesh. Clinical assessment was performed by three breast surgeons actively working on cancer surveillance who knew that the patients had experienced mesh application. After a mean follow-up period of 30 months, a standard mammogram was performed for each patient and analyzed by both the surgeons and an expert radiologist. The evaluated factors were hyperemia, calcifications, contour irregularities, capsular contraction, thickening or widening of the scar with extrusion of the mesh, and any palpable or hardened areas.

RESULTS

According to the authors' clinical observations, there were no mesh-related abnormalities in the breast; the mesh was not palpable after the operation; and there was no recurrent ptosis. In terms of mammographic imaging, the mesh was visible as a very fine line in the periphery of the breast's parenchyma (measuring 0.2 mm on the lateral views) in three patients (17%). The mesh did not interfere with the visualization and analysis of the breast's parenchyma. In seven patients (39%), benign localized microcalcifications were detected in the breast and no further investigation was performed. In two patients (11%), grouped calcifications were detected and biopsied, with histopathologic analysis demonstrating epithelial hyperplasia with atypia. In two patients (11%), nodules smaller than 1 cm were detected and biopsied, with histopathologic analysis demonstrating a fibroadenoma in one patient and an invasive ductal carcinoma in the other.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of mesh support in breast surgery can enhance the aesthetic results without inducing visible or palpable deformities or mammographic abnormalities. In terms of surveillance mammograms, the presence of the mesh did not interfere with the diagnosis and treatment of minute lesions such as calcifications and small nodules.

Biostability, inflammatory response, and healing characteristics of a fluoropassivated polyester-knit mesh in the repair of experimental abdominal hernias

The present study was undertaken to validate the benefits of a fluoropolymer treatment on the biostability, inflammatory response, and healing characteristics of a polyester mesh used for hernia repair, the Fluoromesh, as compared to a commercial monofilament-knit polypropylene mesh, Marlex, used as the control. Both were implanted for the repair of surgically induced abdominal hernias in piglets for prescheduled durations of implantation of 4, 15, and 60 days. The mesh and surrounding tissue were harvested at the sacrifice for the bursting strength and inflammatory response measurements in terms of alkaline and acid phosphatase secretion in the tissue, and for histological observations of the healing sequence and tissue thickness measurements by histomorphometric techniques. After cleaning to remove adherent tissue, the presence of the fluoropolymer at the surface of the mesh was detected using SEM and ESCA. The results demonstrated greater mechanical reinforcement and tissue development for the Fluoromesh than for the polypropylene mesh. The healing performance of the Fluoromesh was attributed to a more intense chronic inflammatory reaction early after implantation that stimulated significantly greater tissue ingrowth and integration. The concentration of fluoropolymer at the surface of the mesh was masked as a result of biological species adsorption. Textile analysis revealed that the Fluoromesh was dimensionally more stable in vivo than the polypropylene control mesh, which demonstrated stretching in the weft direction and shrinking in the warp direction during implantation.

Organ culture in 3-dimensional matrix: in vitro model for evaluating biological compliance of synthetic meshes for abdominal wall repair

A new in vitro method to evaluate the early critical interactions between synthetic prosthetic materials and growing tissues is reported. The correct spatial organization and proper cell to cell interaction required to mimic the in vivo environment was obtained in a 3-dimensional (3-D) embryo organ culture. The clot formed by plasma and chick-embryo extract provided a natural 3-D extracellular matrix that was able to support the growth and differentiation of intestinal tissue dissected from 12-day-old chick embryos. Different materials used for the repair of abdominal wall defects were taken as standards; all the prosthetic materials were devoid of any evident cytotoxic potential over a 10-day culture period, so they did not interfere with the organogenesis process. A polyglactin mesh (Vicryl) was fully incorporated into the growing tissue, but early signs of its degradation were detectable. The biologically inert materials polyethylene terephthalate (Mersilene) and polypropylene (Marlex, Prolene, and Herniamesh) retained their structural integrity when incubated with cultured tissue at 37 degrees C, and they did not hinder cellular proliferation or fibroblast migration. However, the outgrowth behavior was very different while the connective tissue invaded the interstices of the polyethylene terephthalate mesh; the explants and the migrating cells were repelled by hydrophobic polypropylene meshes. These findings are in agreement with other reported results in in vivo studies. Therefore, this method can be considered as reliable and predictable for the evaluation of biopolymers.

Patch incorporation in diaphragmatic hernia

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Biomaterial insertion often is required for closure of congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH). The optimal biomaterial remains uncertain. This study was designed to compare a commonly used patch (polytetrafluoroethylene) with a recently available fabric, fluorinated polyester. The aim of this study was to determine the clinical performance, histological tissue-polymer interaction, bacterial adhesion, and shrinkage rates of biomaterial inserted endoscopically into a CDH lamb model.

METHODS

Polytetrafluoro-ethylene (PTFE) and fluorinated polyester (FP) were randomised for laparoscopic patch insertion into 12 lambs. All lambs (age <4 weeks) underwent 3-port laparoscopy, surgical creation of diaphragmatic hernia, and sutured patch placement. Two PTFE and 2 FP lambs were killed at 1-, 3-, and 6-month intervals postoperatively. Postmortem examination histopathology, electron microscopy, and specific bacterial broth immersion (Escherichia coil, Staphylococcus aurens, and epidermidis) were performed.

RESULTS

All 12 lambs completed the study with intact patches that were fully peritonised. One abdominal adhesion was noted in a FP lamb at 6 months. FP was comparatively easier to insert, manipulate, and suture endoscopically. Histopathology findings showed that PTFE patches created a strong peripheral foreign body reaction with dystrophic calcification, whereas FP was well incorporated with intrapatch fibroblastic activity and neovascularsation. No significant difference in resistance to bacterial adhesion of relevant organisms was noted between the materials. Graft shrinkage for FP was 7% in one direction only, evident by 3 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Fluorinated polyester has advantages in this laparoscopic lamb model. It shows rapid and sustained incorporation with intrapatch neovascularisation when compared with polytetrafluoro-ethylene's significant foreign body reaction. It was preferred for its endoscopic handling and suturing properties. The laparoscopic techniques used may contribute to the general lack of adhesions, and insufficient data are available to comment on the comparative effect of the materials on adhesion formation. No difference was demonstrated in resistance to bacterial adherence in the harvested materials.