Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mosquito Net Mesh for Abdominal Wall Hernioplasty: A Comparison of Material Characteristics with Commercial Prosthetics

  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The use of sterilized mosquito net as a cheaper alternative to commercial mesh used in hernia repair has previously been published. However, as no standards with regard to the material have been documented, we aimed to define the characteristics of a commonly available and low-cost mosquito net, which has already been shown to be clinically efficacious in groin hernia repair. We compared its characteristics to other commercially available meshes, in keeping with the well-established FDA and MHRA regulatory processes.

Methods

The macromolecular structure of the mosquito net was determined by vibrational spectroscopy. The ultrastructure of the meshes was examined with scanning electron microscopy, and uniaxial and burst tensile strength testing was performed. The following parameters were assessed: polymer type, filament characteristics, pore size, weight, linear density, elasticity, and tensile strength.

Results

The mosquito net was a polyethylene homopolymer, knitted from monofilament fibers with a mean filament diameter of 109.7 μm and a mean mesh thickness of 480 μm. The mean pore maximum diameter was 1.9 mm, with 91.2 % porosity, 53.7 g/m2 mean mesh weight, and a linear mass density of 152 denier. This was comparable to the “large pore” (class I) commercial meshes. The bursting force for polyethylene mosquito net was greater than for UltraPro and Vypro (43.0 vs. 35.5 and 27.2 N/cm, respectively), and the mosquito net exhibited less anisotropy compared to the commercial meshes.

Conclusions

The material and mechanical properties of the polyethylene mosquito net are substantially equivalent to those of commonly used lightweight commercial meshes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Shillcutt SD, Clarke MG, Kingsnorth AN (2010) Cost-effectiveness of groin hernia surgery in the Western Region of Ghana. Arch Surg 145:954–961

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Stephenson BM, Kingsnorth AN (2011) Inguinal hernioplasty using mosquito net mesh in low income countries: an alternative and cost effective prosthesis. BMJ 343:d7448

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kingsnorth AN, Tongaonkar RR, Awojobi OA (2011) Commentary on: low-cost mesh for inguinal hernia repair in resource-limited settings. Hernia 15:491–494

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Clarke MG, Oppong C, Simmermacher R et al (2009) The use of sterilised polyester mosquito net mesh for inguinal hernia repair in Ghana. Hernia 13:155–159

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Kingsnorth A (2007) Commercial mesh vs. nylon mosquito net for hernia repair. World J Surg 31:859. doi:10.1007/s00268-006-0894-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gundre NP, Iyer SP, Subramaniyan P (2012) Prospective randomized controlled study using polyethylene mesh for inguinal hernia meshplasty as a safe and cost-effective alternative to polypropylene mesh. Updates Surg 64:37–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Freudenberg S, Sano D, Ouangre E et al (2006) Commercial mesh versus nylon mosquito net for hernia repair. A randomized double-blind study in Burkina Faso. World J Surg 30:1784–1789. doi:10.1007/s00268-006-0108-3 discussion 1790

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ozgediz D, Galukande M, Mabweijano J et al (2008) The neglect of the global surgical workforce: experience and evidence from Uganda. World J Surg 32:1208–1215. doi:10.1007/s00268-008-9473-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Frey DM, Wildisen A, Hamel CT et al (2007) Randomized clinical trial of Lichtenstein’s operation versus mesh plug for inguinal hernia repair. Br J Surg 94:36–41

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Vironen J, Nieminen J, Eklund A et al (2006) Randomized clinical trial of Lichtenstein patch or Prolene Hernia System for inguinal hernia repair. Br J Surg 93:33–39

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Franneby U, Sandblom G, Nordin P et al (2006) Risk factors for long-term pain after hernia surgery. Ann Surg 244:212–219

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Wilhelm TJ, Anemana S, Kyamanywa P et al (2006) Anaesthesia for elective inguinal hernia repair in rural Ghana—appeal for local anaesthesia in resource-poor countries. Trop Doc 36:147–149

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Sanders DL, Kingsnorth AN (2011) From ancient to contemporary times: a concise history of incisional hernia repair. Hernia 16:1–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sanders DL, Kingsnorth AN (2012) Prosthetic mesh materials used in hernia surgery. Expert Rev Med Devices 9:159–179

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ashar BS, Dang JM, Krause D et al (2011) Performing clinical studies involving hernia mesh devices: what every investigator should know about the FDA investigational device exemption (IDE) process. Hernia 15:603–605

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Savi GB (1933) The mosquito net. Wright & Brown, London

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fox CA (2008) Mosquito net: a story of the pioneers of tropical medicine. i2i Publishers, Manchester

    Google Scholar 

  18. Wilhelm TJ, Freudenberg S, Jonas E et al (2007) Sterilized mosquito net versus commercial mesh for hernia repair. An experimental study in goats in Mbarara/Uganda. Eur Surg Res 39:312–317

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Tongaonkar RR, Reddy BV, Mehta VK et al (2003) Preliminary multicentric trial of cheap indigenous mosquito-net cloth for tension free hernia repair. Indian J Surg 65:89–95

    Google Scholar 

  20. Anderson JM (1988) Inflammatory response to implants. ASAIO Trans 34:101–107

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Medical Device Agency Usfss (2002) Benchtop steam sterilizers—guidance on purchase, operation and maintenance, Available online at: http://www.mhra.gov.uk/home/groups/dts-bi/documents/publication/con007327.pdf. Accessed 6 Jan 2013

  22. Stephenson BM, Kingsnorth AN (2011) Safety and sterilization of mosquito net mesh for humanitarian inguinal hernioplasty. World J Surg 35:1957–1960. doi:10.1007/s00268-011-1176-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Junge K, Klinge U, Prescher A et al (2001) Elasticity of the anterior abdominal wall and impact for reparation of incisional hernias using mesh implants. Hernia 5:113–118

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Klinge U, Klosterhalfen B, Conze J et al (1998) Modified mesh for hernia repair that is adapted to the physiology of the abdominal wall. Eur J Surg 164:951–960

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Deeken CR, Abdo MS, Frisella MM et al (2011) Physicomechanical evaluation of polypropylene, polyester, and polytetrafluoroethylene meshes for inguinal hernia repair. J Am Coll Surg 212:68–79

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Farmer DL (2010) Surgeon, do you know where your DALYs are?: (Can you fix a hernia with a mosquito net?): comment on “cost-effectiveness of groin hernia surgery in the Western Region of Ghana”. Arch Surg 145:961

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Udwadia TE (2007) Commercial mesh versus nylon mosquito net for hernia repair. A randomized double-blind study in Burkina Faso. World J Surg 31:858. doi:10.1007/s00268-006-0820-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to Mr. Peter Bond, BSc. at the Plymouth Electron Microscopy Centre for his contribution to the electron microscopy analysis of the meshes.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Royal Cornwall Hospital, Truro, TR1 3LJ, UK

    David L. Sanders

  2. “Operation Hernia”, Department of Surgery, Derriford Hospital, Plymouth, PL6 8DH, UK

    Andrew N. Kingsnorth

  3. Department of Surgery, Royal Gwent Hospital, Newport, South Wales, NP20 2UB, UK

    Brian M. Stephenson

Authors
  1. David L. Sanders
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrew N. Kingsnorth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Brian M. Stephenson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David L. Sanders.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sanders, D.L., Kingsnorth, A.N. & Stephenson, B.M. Mosquito Net Mesh for Abdominal Wall Hernioplasty: A Comparison of Material Characteristics with Commercial Prosthetics. World J Surg 37, 737–745 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-012-1900-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-012-1900-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation