Comparing the Behavior of Different Polypropylene Meshes (Heavy and Lightweight) in an Experimental Model of Ventral Hernia Repair
Comparing the Behavior of Different Polypropylene Meshes (Heavy and Lightweight) in an Experimental Model of Ventral Hernia Repair
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/jbm.b.31234
复制
发表时间：
2009-05-01
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Bujan, J.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bellon, J. M.;Rodriguez, M.;Bujan, J.
新一代用于腹壁修复的假体生物材料被设计得密度更低，其孔隙比标准聚丙烯网片更大，以提高腹壁顺应性。本研究的目的是分析这些新型网片的功能和形态特性。为此，在36只雄性新西兰白兔的前腹壁制造了7×5平方厘米的缺损，并用不同的聚丙烯网片进行修复：一种重磅网片（HW），即Surgipro，以及两种轻量网片（LW），即Parietene和Optilene。在术后第14天和第90天，分别处死6只植入了生物材料的动物。进行了组织学和形态计量分析、粘连评估以及生物力学抗性测试。轻量网片和重磅网片在诱导的粘连和巨噬细胞反应方面表现出相似的行为。14天后，Optilene的抗张强度大于其他两种生物材料记录的强度，可能是因为其高弹性。然而，到90天时，三种生物材料的抗张强度相当。总之，尽管孔隙较大的网片在初期显示出抗张强度优势，但在植入90天后，抗张强度相似。与重磅网片相比，轻量假体的优点是植入的异物更少，保留了受体宿主组织的弹性。（C）2008威利期刊公司。《生物医学材料研究杂志B辑：应用生物材料》8913：448 - 455，2009
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 X 5 cm(2) 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. (C) 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Apt Biomater 8913: 448-455, 2009