Composite prostheses for the repair of abdominal wall defects: Effect of the structure of the adhesion barrier component

被引：14

作者：

Bellón J.M. ^{[1
]}

García-Honduvilla N. ^{[1
]}

Serrano N. ^{[1
]}

Rodríguez M. ^{[1
]}

Pascual G. ^{[2
]}

Buján J. ^{[2
]}

机构：

[1] Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Alcalá University, 28871 Alcala de Henares, Madrid, Ctra. N-II

[2] Department of Medical Specialities, Faculty of Medicine, Alcalá University, 28871 Alcala de Henares, Madrid, Ctra. N-II

来源：

Hernia | 2005年 / 9卷 / 4期

关键词：

Abdominal wall repair; Composites; Macrophages; Peritoneal adhesions; Polypropylene;

D O I：

10.1007/s10029-005-0012-z

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

The component of a composite prosthesis, which makes contact with the visceral peritoneum, can be reabsorbable or non-reabsorbable, and laminar or reticular. This study was designed to determine whether the composition of this second, barrier component could improve its behavior at this interface. Abdominal wall defects in rabbits were repaired using a polypropylene prosthesis (PP), or the composites Sepramesh (PP+h) or Vicryl (PP+v). Fourteen days after surgery, the implants were evaluated by light and scanning electron microscopy, and immunohistochemistry. Prosthetic areas occupied by adhesions (PP: 71.08±5.09, PP+h: 18.55±4.96, P+v: 69.69±16.81%), neoperitoneal thickness (PP: 256.17±21.68, PP+h: 83.11±19.63, PP+v:213.72±35.90 μm) and macrophage counts (PP: 8.73±1.16, PP+h: 27.33±4.13, PP+v: 31.24±3.08%) showed significant differences (P < 0.05). The tested biomaterials induced an optimal recipient tissue infiltration. Least adhesion formation was observed on the PP+h implants. This suggests that the second component, although reabsorbable, should be smooth in structure. © Springer-Verlag 2005.

引用

页码：338 / 343

页数：5

共 21 条

[1]

Karakousis C.P., Volpe C., Tanski J., Colby E.M., Winston J., Driscoll D.L., Use of mesh for musculoaponeurotic defects of the abdominal wall in cancer surgery and the risk of bowel fistulas J, Am Coll Surg, 181, pp. 11-16, (1995)

[2]

Leber G.E., Garb J.L., Alexander A.I., William P.R., Long-term complications associated with prosthetic repair of incisional hernias, Arch Surg, 133, pp. 378-382, (1998)

[3]

Chew D.K., Choi L.H., Rogers A.M., Enterocutaneous fistula 14 years after prosthetic mesh repair of a ventral incisional hernia: A life-long risk?, Surgery, 127, pp. 352-353, (2000)

[4]

Losanoff J.E., Richman B.W., Jones J.W., Entero-colocutaneous fistula: A late consequence of polypropylene mesh abdominal wall repair: Case report and review of the literature, Hernia, 6, pp. 144-147, (2002)

[5]

Savioz D., Ludwing C., Leissing C., Bolle J.F., Buthler Morel P.H., Repeated macroscopic haematuria caused by intravesical migration of a preperitoneal prosthesis, Eu J Surg, 163, pp. 631-632, (1997)

[6]

Bellon J.M., Bujan J., Contreras L., Carrera-San Martin A., Jurado F., Comparison of a new type of polytetrafluoroethylene patch (Mycro Mesh) and polypropylene prosthesis (Marlex) for repair of abdominal wall defects, J Am Coll Surg, 183, pp. 11-18, (1996)

[7]

Schein M., Wittmann D.H., Aprahamian C.C., Condon R.E., The abdominal compartment syndrome: The physiological and clinical consequences of elevated intra-abdominal pressure, J Am Coll Surg, 180, pp. 745-753, (1995)

[8]

Bellon J.M., Contreras L., Pascual G., Bujan J., Neoperitoneal formation after implantation of various biomaterials for the repair of abdominal wall defects in rabbits, Eur J Surg, 165, pp. 145-150, (1999)

[9]

Bellon J.M., Contreras L., Bujan J., Jurado F., Effect of phosphatidylcholine on the process of peritoneal adhesion following implantation of a polypropylene mesh prosthesis, Biomaterials, 17, pp. 1369-1372, (1996)

[10]

Bellon J.M., Bujan J., Contreras L., Hernando A., Jurado F., Macrophage response to experimental implantation of polypropylene prostheses, Eur Surg Res, 26, pp. 46-53, (1994)

← 1 2 3 →