Hernia

, Volume 15, Issue 1, pp 47–52 | Cite as

Anisotropic evaluation of synthetic surgical meshes

  • E. R. Saberski
  • S. B. Orenstein
  • Y. W. Novitsky
Original Article

Abstract

Introduction

The material properties of meshes used in hernia repair contribute to the overall mechanical behavior of the repair. The anisotropic potential of synthetic meshes, representing a difference in material properties (e.g., elasticity) in different material axes, is not well defined to date. Haphazard orientation of anisotropic mesh material can contribute to inconsistent surgical outcomes. We aimed to characterize and compare anisotropic properties of commonly used synthetic meshes.

Methods

Six different polypropylene (Trelex®, ProLite™, Ultrapro™), polyester (Parietex™), and PTFE-based (Dualmesh®, Infinit) synthetic meshes were selected. Longitudinal and transverse axes were defined for each mesh, and samples were cut in each axis orientation. Samples underwent uniaxial tensile testing, from which the elastic modulus (E) in each axis was determined. The degree of anisotropy (λ) was calculated as a logarithmic expression of the ratio between the elastic modulus in each axis.

Results

Five of six meshes displayed significant anisotropic behavior. Ultrapro™ and Infinit exhibited approximately 12- and 20-fold differences between perpendicular axes, respectively. Trelex®, ProLite™, and Parietex™ were 2.3–2.4 times. Dualmesh® was the least anisotropic mesh, without marked difference between the axes.

Conclusion

Anisotropy of synthetic meshes has been underappreciated. In this study, we found striking differences between elastic properties of perpendicular axes for most commonly used synthetic meshes. Indiscriminate orientation of anisotropic mesh may adversely affect hernia repairs. Proper labeling of all implants by manufacturers should be mandatory. Understanding the specific anisotropic behavior of synthetic meshes should allow surgeons to employ rational implant orientation to maximize outcomes of hernia repair.

Keywords

Anisotropy Synthetic Mesh Hernia Biomechanical test 

Notes

Acknowledgment

This study was funded by institutional support from the University of Connecticut Health Center.

Conflicts of interest

Dr. Y. Novitsky has received consulting and/or speaking fees from Ethicon Inc., W.L. Gore Inc., and Covidien. Mr. E. Saberski and Dr. S. Orenstein have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose for this study.

References

  1. 1.
    Cassar K, Munro A (2002) Surgical treatment of incisional hernia. Br J Surg 89:534–545CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    McCormack K, Scott NW, Go PM, Ross S, Grant AM (2003) Laparoscopic techniques versus open techniques for inguinal hernia repair. Cochrane Database Syst Rev:CD001785Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Usher FC, Ochsner J, Tuttle LL Jr (1958) Use of marlex mesh in the repair of incisional hernias. Am Surg 24:969–974PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bachman S, Ramshaw B (2008) Prosthetic material in ventral hernia repair: how do I choose? Surg Clin North Am 88:101–112 ixCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Udwadia T (2006) Inguinal hernia repair: the total picture. J Min Access Surg 2:144–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Welty G, Klinge U, Klosterhalfen B, Kasperk R, Schumpelick V (2001) Functional impairment and complaints following incisional hernia repair with different polypropylene meshes. Hernia 5:142–147CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cobb WS, Burns JM, Peindl RD, Carbonell AM, Matthews BD, Kercher KW, Heniford BT (2006) Textile analysis of heavy weight, mid-weight, and light weight polypropylene mesh in a porcine ventral hernia model. J Surg Res 136:1–7CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Klosterhalfen B, Klinge U, Schumpelick V (1998) Functional and morphological evaluation of different polypropylene-mesh modifications for abdominal wall repair. Biomaterials 19:2235–2246CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    DuBay DA, Wang X, Adamson B, Kuzon WM Jr, Dennis RG, Franz MG (2006) Mesh incisional herniorrhaphy increases abdominal wall elastic properties: a mechanism for decreased hernia recurrences in comparison with suture repair. Surgery 140:14–24CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Novitsky YW, Harrell AG, Hope WW, Kercher KW, Heniford BT (2007) Meshes in hernia repair. Surg Technol Int 16:123–127PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Beer FP, Johnston ER, DeWolf JT (2006) Mechanics of materials, 4th edn. McGraw Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ozkaya N, Nordin M (1999) Fundamentals of Biomechanics: equilibrium, motion, and deformation, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Junge K, Klinge U, Prescher A, Giboni P, Niewiera M, Schumpelick V (2001) Elasticity of the anterior abdominal wall and impact for reparation of incisional hernias using mesh implants. Hernia 5:113–118CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Grassel D, Prescher A, Fitzek S, Keyserlingk DG, Axer H (2005) Anisotropy of human linea alba: a biomechanical study. J Surg Res 124:118–125CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Anurov M, Titkova S, Oettinger A (2009) Effectiveness of experimental hernia repair depends on orientation of mesh implant with anisotropic structure. 4th International Hernia Congress: Joint Meeting of the AHS and EHS, Berlin, Germany, Hernia 13(Suppl 1)1:S14–15Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Callister WD (2005) Materials science and engineering: an integrated approach, 2nd edn. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cobb WS, Kercher KW, Heniford BT (2005) The argument for lightweight polypropylene mesh in hernia repair. Surg Innov 12:63–69CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hollinsky C, Hollinsky KH (1999) Static calculations for mesh fixation by intraabdominal pressure in laparoscopic extraperitoneal herniorrhaphy. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 9:106–109CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Majercik S, Tsikitis V, Iannitti DA (2006) Strength of tissue attachment to mesh after ventral hernia repair with synthetic composite mesh in a porcine model. Surg Endosc 20:1671–1674CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Klinge U, Klosterhalfen B, Conze J, Limberg W, Obolenski B, Ottinger AP, Schumpelick V (1998) Modified mesh for hernia repair that is adapted to the physiology of the abdominal wall. Eur J Surg 164:951–960CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. R. Saberski
    • 1
  • S. B. Orenstein
    • 2
  • Y. W. Novitsky
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.University of Connecticut School of MedicineFarmingtonUSA
  2. 2.Connecticut Comprehensive Center for Hernia Repair, Department of SurgeryUniversity of Connecticut Health CenterFarmingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations