Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Sublay repair results in superior mesh incorporation and histological fibrogenesis in comparison to onlay and primary suture in an experimental rat model

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Hernia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To compare adhesion scores, repair strength and histological findings among sublay, onlay and primary repair incisional hernioplasty techniques. Surgical repairs were employed directly on healthy animals, without previous hernia induction, to avoid confounding factors related to hernia development.

Methods

Forty Wistar rats were divided into four groups, control, simulation, onlay and sublay. After 42 days, adhesion intensity, tensile strength of the abdominal wall and anatomopathological histological substrate were compared.

Results

SL group presented greater adhesion scores (p < 0.0001), higher tensiometric (p < 0.0001), and was characterized by more histiocytes, mononuclear cells, macrovacuolar granulomas and type I collagen on histological analysis. Pearson correlation between adhesions and tensiometry, and between tensiometry and neocollagenization showed a strong positive association (r = 0.8905 and 0.6757, respectively in SL group, p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Mesh positioning in sublay compartment was followed by increased adhesion development and provides a stronger mesh–tissue attachment, in addition, resulted in a different histological profile of the inflammation/repair substrate. The intensity of these findings was directly correlated, suggesting they could be the result of a common biological phenomenon. Our findings indicate that mesh placement following the retromuscular technique generates a superior repair response, and give clues to a better understanding of the superiority of sublay repair in achieving lower recurrence rates. Characterization of the cellular and molecular elements responsible for the superiority of this technique is in our view an essential prerequisite aiming for improvements in the therapeutic options for the treatment of this disease.

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
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Millikan KW (2003) Incisional hernia repair. Surg Clin N Am 83:1223–1234

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. den Hartog D, Dur AH, Tuinebreijer WE, Kreis RW (2008) Open surgical procedures for incisional hernias. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD006438

    Google Scholar 

  3. Luijendijk RW, Hop WCJ, van den Tol P, de Lange DCD, Braaksma MMJ, Ijzermans JNM, Boelhouwer RU, de Vries BC, Salu MKM, Wereldsma JCJ, Bruijninckx CMA, Jeekel J (2010) A comparison of suture repair with mesh repair for incisional hernia. N Engl J Med 343(6):392–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Burger JW, Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, Halm J, Verdaasdonk EG, Jeekel J (2004) Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia. Ann Surg 240(4):578–583

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Biondo-Simões MLP, Morais CF, Tocchio AFZ, Miranda RA, Moura PAP, Colla K, Robes RR, Ioshii SO, Tomasich FDS (2016) Characteristics of the fibroplasia and collagen expression in the abdominal wall after implant of the polypropylene mesh and polypropylene/polyglecaprone mesh in rats. Acta Cir Bras 31:294–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Nursal TZ, Hamalogku E (1999) Insizyonel herniler. T Klin Cerrahi 4:182–187

    Google Scholar 

  7. Batkir A, Dogru O, Girgin M, Aygen E, Kanat BH, Dabak DO, Kuloglu T (2013) The effects of different prosthetic materials on the formation of collagen types in incisional hernia. Hernia 17:249–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Albino F, Patel K, Nahabedian M, Sosin M, Attinger C, Bhanot P (2013) Does mesh location matter in abdominal wall reconstruction. A systematic review of the literature and a summary of recommendations. Plast Reconstr Surg 132(5):1295–1304

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hawn M, Snyder C, Graham L, Gray S, Finan K, Vick C (2010) Long-term follow up of technical outcomes for incisional hernia repair. J Am Coll Surg 210(5):648–655

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Holihan JL, Nguyen DH, Nguyen MT, Mo J, Kao LS, Liang MK (2016) Mesh location in open ventral hernia repair: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. World J Surg 40:89

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Chevrel JP (1979) The treatment of large midline incisional hernias by “overcoat” platy and prothesis (author’s transl). Nouv Presse Med 8(9):695–696

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Rivers J, Lardennois B, Pire JC, Hibon J (1973) Large incisional hernias. The importance of flail abdomen and of subsequent respiratory disorders. Chirurgie 99(8):547–563

    Google Scholar 

  13. Neligan P, Peter C (2015) Plastic surgery: principles, 3rd edn. Elsevier, Rio de Janeiro, pp 240–252

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ricciardi BF, Chequim LH, Gama RR, Hassegawa L (2012) Correction of abdominal hernia with mesh surrounded by fibrous tissue—study in Wistar rats. Rev Col Bras Cir 39(3):195–200

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Jairam AP, Timmermans L, Eker HH, Pierik R, van Klaveren D, Steyerberg EW et al (2017) Prevention of incisional hernia with prophylactic onlay and sublay mesh reinforcement versus primary suture only in midline laparotomies (PRIMA): 2-year follow-up of a multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 390(10094):567–576

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Serigiolle LC, Barbieri RL, Gomes HMP, Rodrigues DAB, Studart SV, Leme PLS (2015) Critical analysis of experimental models for the study of adherences after induced incisional hernias in rats and abdominal wall repair with different biomaterials. Arq Bras Cir Dig 28(3):178–182

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Klosterhafen B, Junge K, Hermanns B, Klinge U (2002) Influence of implantation interval on the long-term biocompatibility of surgical mesh. Br J Surg 89:1043–1048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Morris-stiff GJ, Hughes LE (1998) The outcomes of nonabsorbable mesh placed within the abdominal cavity: literature review and clinical experience. J Am Coll Surg 186:352–367

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. van’t Riet M, Burger JW, Bonthuis F, Jeekel J, Bonjer JH (2004) Prevention of adhesion formation to polypropylene mesh by collagen coating. A randomized controlled study in a rat model of ventral hernia repair. Surg Endosc 18:681–685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Sergent F, Desilles N, Lacoume Y, Tuech J, Marie J, Bunel C (2010) Biomechanical analysis of polypropylene prosthetic implants for hernia repair: an experimental study. Am J Surg 200:406–412

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Schonleben F, Reck T, Tannapfel A, Hohenberger W, Schneider I (2006) Collagen foil (TissuFoil E) reduces the formation of adhesions when using polypropylene mesh for the repair of experimental abdominal wall defects. Int J Colorectal Dis 21:840–846

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Utiyama E, Rosa M, Andres M, Miranda J, Damous S, Birolini C, Damous L, Montero E (2015) Polypropylene and polypropylene/polyglecaprone (Ultrapro®) meshes in the repair of incisional hernias in rats. Acta Cir Bras 30(6):379–381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Voskerician G, Jin J, Hunter S, Williams C, White M, Rosen M (2009) Human peritoneal membrane reduces the formation of intra-abdominal adhesions in ventral hernia repair: experimental study in a chronic hernia rat model. J Surg Res 157:108–114

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Akinci M, Ergul Z, Kantarcioglu M, Tapan S, Ozier M, Gunal A, Kulacoglu H, Ide T, Sayal A, Eryilmaz M, Kozak O (2014) The effect of relaparotomy timing on wound healing in an animal model. Int J Surg 12:1434–1438

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Utrabo C, Czeczko N, Busato C, Montemór-Netto M, Lipinski L, Malafaia (2017) Tensiometric analysis of meshes used in abdominal ventral wall defects in rats. Arq Bras Cir Dig 30(3):165–168

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Höer J, Töns Ch, Schachtrupp A, Anurov M, Titkova S, Oettinger A, Schumpelick S (2002) Quantitative evaluation of abdominal wall perfusion after different types of laparotomy closure using laser fluorescence videography. Hernia 6:11–16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Schachtrupp A, Wetter O, Höer J (2016) An implantable sensor device measuring suture tension dynamics: results of developmental and experimental work. Hernia 20:601–606

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Altman A, Khalek F, Alt E, Butler C (2010) Adipose tissue-derived stem cells enhance bioprosthetic mesh repair in ventral hernias. Plast Reconstr Surg 126(3):845–854

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Maeda CT, Artigani Neto R, Lopes-Filho GJ, Linhares MM (2016) Experimental study of inflammatory response and collagen morphometry with different types of meshes. Hernia 20:859–867

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Binnebösel M, Klink CD, Otto J, Conze J, Jansen PL, Anurov M, Schumpelik V, Junge K (2010) Impact of mesh positioning on foreign body reaction and collagenous ingrowth in a rabbit model of open incisional hernia repair. Hernia 14:71–77

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Interdisciplinar Surgical Science Post-Graduate Course, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil

    F. Ponce Leon

  2. Department of Surgery, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil

    J. E. F. Manso, P. C. Silva & R. Martinez

  3. Department of Pathology, Hospital da Força Aérea do Galeão (HFAG), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil

    W. Nogueira

  4. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil

    V. L. Abud

  5. Departamento de Pós Graduação em Ciências Cirúrgicas da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Carlos Chagas Filho avenue, Centro de Ciências da Saúde-UFRJ, block K, 2nd floor, Ilha do Fundão, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 21941590, Brazil

    F. Ponce Leon

  6. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

    F. Ponce Leon

Authors
  1. F. Ponce Leon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. E. F. Manso
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. V. L. Abud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. W. Nogueira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. P. C. Silva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. R. Martinez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest in this research.

Ethical approval

The authors declare that that the ethical standards were obeyed, beginning their work and research after approval of the Ethics Committee for the Use of Animals in Scientific Experimentation of the Health Sciences Center of the Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (CEUA-CCS), registered in the National Council for the Control of Animal Experimentation (CONCEA) under process number 01200.001568/2013-87.

Human and animal rights

All procedures performed in studies involving animals were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institution or practice at which the studies were conducted.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ponce Leon, F., Manso, J.E.F., Abud, V.L. et al. Sublay repair results in superior mesh incorporation and histological fibrogenesis in comparison to onlay and primary suture in an experimental rat model. Hernia 22, 1089–1100 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-018-1808-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10029-018-1808-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation