Advertisement

Hernia

, Volume 17, Issue 6, pp 773–777 | Cite as

Biomechanical properties of (semi-) synthetic glues for mesh fixation in endoscopic inguinal hernia repair

  • C. Schug-Pass
  • D. A. JacobEmail author
  • J. Rittinghausen
  • H. Lippert
  • F. Köckerling
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

In endoscopic inguinal hernia repair, the use of fibrin glues for mesh fixation instead of staples and sutures can demonstrably reduce postoperative morbidity without increasing the recurrence rate. Various fibrin glues differ in terms of their mesh fixation strength. As an alternative to fibrin glue, there is an increasing trend toward using synthetic glues for mesh fixation in both open and endoscopic inguinal hernia surgery. To date, no studies have been conducted comparing the fixation strength of (semi-) synthetic glues with that of fibrin glues. Here, using a biomechanical model, we compared the adhesive strength of two glues (BioGlue and Glubran) used in surgery with a fibrin glue.

Methods

We used light-weight polypropylene meshes (TiMesh light). In each case, the biomechanical stability of five meshes in each group was tested with 2 ml fibrin glue (Evicel), 2 ml BioGlue or 2 ml Glubran (cyanoacrylate). The defect in the muscle tissue used was 4.5 cm in diameter for a mesh size of 10 × 15 cm. Measurements were taken using a standardized stamp penetration test while aiming not to remain under a minimum fixation strength of 32 N.

Results

Using Evicel for mesh fixation, an adhesive strength of 64.3 N was achieved. This was significantly greater than that obtained in the absence of fixation (2.9 N, p < 0.001) and higher than the requisite value of 32 N. Using Glubran, it was possible once again to significantly improve the adhesive strength (105.4 N, p = 0.008). The use of BioGlue improved the adhesive strength to 131.7 N, but not significantly so compared with Glubran (p = 0.110).

Conclusions

In terms of adhesive strength, (semi-) synthetic glues can be used for mesh fixation instead of fibrin glue and even achieve significantly better adhesive strength than fibrin glue. However, further clinical studies are needed to identify the role of (semi-) synthetic glues compared with fibrin glues in endoscopic inguinal hernia surgery.

Keywords

Inguinal hernia Mesh fixation Glues 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Mr. Heinlein from Biocer Entwicklungs-GmbH for technical support in conducting and analyzing the experiments.

References

  1. 1.
    Lau H (2005) Fibrin sealant versus mechanical stapling for mesh fixation during endoscopic extraperitoneal inguinal hernioplasty: a randomized prospective trial. Ann Surg 242(5):670–675PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Novik B, Hagedorn S, Mork UB, Dahlin K, Skullman S, Dalenback J (2006) Fibrin glue for securing the mesh in laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: a study with a 40-month prospective follow-up period. Surg Endosc 20(3):462–467PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Olmi S, Erba L, Bertolini A, Scaini A, Croce E (2006) Fibrin glue for mesh fixation in laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) hernia repair: indications, technique, and outcomes. Surg Endosc 20(12):1846–1850PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lovisetto F, Zonta S, Rota E, Mazzilli M, Bardone M, Bottero L, Faillace G, Longoni M (2007) Use of human fibrin glue (Tissucol) versus staples for mesh fixation in laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal hernioplasty: a prospective, randomized study. Ann Surg 245(2):222–231PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schwab R, Willms A, Kroger A, Becker HP (2006) Less chronic pain following mesh fixation using a fibrin sealant in TEP inguinal hernia repair. Hernia 10(3):272–277PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kaul A, Hutfless S, Le H, Hamed SA, Tymitz K, Nguyen H, Marohn MR (2012) Staple versus fibrin glue fixation in laparoscopic total extraperitoneal repair of inguinal hernia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 26(5):1269–1278PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schug-Pass C, Lippert H, Kockerling F (2010) Primary mesh augmentation with fibrin glue for abdominal wall closure–investigations on a biomechanical model. Langenbeck’s archives of surgery 395(2):151–156PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schug-Pass C, Jacob DA, Lippert H, Kockerling F (2012) Differences in biomechanical stability using various fibrin glue compositions for mesh fixation in endoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Surg Endosc. doi: 10.1007/s00464-012-2339-8
  9. 9.
    Agresta F, Baldazzi GA, Ciardo LF, Trentin G, Giuseppe S, Ferrante F, Bedin N (2007) Lightweight partially absorbable monofilament mesh (polypropylene/poliglecaprone 25) for TAPP inguinal hernia repair: initial experience. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 17(2):91–94PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nowobilski W, Dobosz M, Wojciechowicz T, Mionskowska L (2004) Lichtenstein inguinal hernioplasty using butyl-2-cyanoacrylate versus sutures. Preliminary experience of a prospective randomized trial. Eur Surg Res 36(6):367–370PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Testini M, Lissidini G, Poli E, Gurrado A, Lardo D, Piccinni G (2010) A single-surgeon randomized trial comparing sutures, N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate and human fibrin glue for mesh fixation during primary inguinal hernia repair. Can J Surg 53(3):155–160PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bar A, Sauer T, Bohnert N, Goretzki PE, Lammers BJ (2009) Less pain intensity after lichtenstein-repair by using BioGlue for mesh fixation. Surg Technol Int 18:125–128Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kukleta JF, Freytag C, Weber M (2012) Efficiency and safety of mesh fixation in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair using n-butyl cyanoacrylate: long-term biocompatibility in over 1,300 mesh fixations. Hernia 16(2):153–162PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Scheidbach H, Tamme C, Tannapfel A, Lippert H, Kockerling F (2004) In vivo studies comparing the biocompatibility of various polypropylene meshes and their handling properties during endoscopic total extraperitoneal (TEP) patchplasty: an experimental study in pigs. Surg Endosc 18(2):211–220PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bittner R, Arregui ME, Bisgaard T, Dudai M, Ferzli GS, Fitzgibbons RJ, Fortelny RH, Klinge U, Kockerling F, Kuhry E, Kukleta J, Lomanto D, Misra MC, Montgomery A, Morales-Conde S, Reinpold W, Rosenberg J, Sauerland S, Schug-Pass C, Singh K, Timoney M, Weyhe D, Chowbey P (2011) Guidelines for laparoscopic (TAPP) and endoscopic (TEP) treatment of inguinal hernia [International Endohernia Society (IEHS)]. Surg Endosc 25(9):2773–2843PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Klinge U, Conze J, Klosterhalfen B, Limberg W, Obolenski B, Ottinger AP, Schumpelick V (1996) Changes in abdominal wall mechanics after mesh implantation. Experimental changes in mesh stability. Langenbecks Arch Chir 381(6):323–332PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Azadani AN, Matthews PB, Ge L, Shen Y, Jhun CS, Guy TS, Tseng EE (2009) Mechanical properties of surgical glues used in aortic root replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 87(4):1154–1160PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dilege E, Deveci U, Erbil Y, Dinccag A, Seven R, Ozarmagan S, Mercan S, Barbaros U (2010) N-butyl cyanoacrylate versus conventional suturing for fixation of meshes in an incisional hernia model. J Invest Surg 23(5):262–266PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Garcia Paez JM, Jorge Herrero E, Rocha A, Maestro M, Castillo-Olivares JL, Millan I, Carrera Sanmartin A, Cordon A (2004) Comparative study of the mechanical behaviour of a cyanoacrylate and a bioadhesive. J Mater Sci Mater Med 15(2):109–115PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gruber-Blum S, Petter-Puchner AH, Mika K, Brand J, Redl H, Ohlinger W, Benesch T, Fortelny RH (2010) A comparison of a bovine albumin/glutaraldehyde glue versus fibrin sealant for hernia mesh fixation in experimental onlay and IPOM repair in rats. Surg Endosc 24(12):3086–3094PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kull S, Martinelli I, Briganti E, Losi P, Spiller D, Tonlorenzi S, Soldani G (2009) Glubran2 surgical glue: in vitro evaluation of adhesive and mechanical properties. J Surg Res 157(1):e15–e21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ladurner R, Drosse I, Seitz S, Plitz W, Barbaryka G, Siebeck M, Burklein D, Kirchhoff C, Buhman S, Mutschler W, Schieker M, Mussack T (2008) Tissue attachment strength and adhesion formation of intraabdominal fixed meshes with cyanoacrylat glues. Eur J Med Res 13(5):185–191PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Losi P, Burchielli S, Spiller D, Finotti V, Kull S, Briganti E, Soldani G (2010) Cyanoacrylate surgical glue as an alternative to suture threads for mesh fixation in hernia repair. J Surg Res 163(2):e53–e58PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jourdan IC, Bailey ME (1998) Initial experience with the use of N-butyl 2-cyanoacrylate glue for the fixation of polypropylene mesh in laparoscopic hernia repair. Surg Laparosc Endosc 8(4):291–293PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Fortelny RH, Petter-Puchner AH, Walder N, Mittermayr R, Ohlinger W, Heinze A, Redl H (2007) Cyanoacrylate tissue sealant impairs tissue integration of macroporous mesh in experimental hernia repair. Surg Endosc 21(10):1781–1785PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. Schug-Pass
    • 1
  • D. A. Jacob
    • 1
    Email author
  • J. Rittinghausen
    • 1
  • H. Lippert
    • 2
  • F. Köckerling
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Surgery, Center for Minimally Invasive SurgeryVivantes Hospital SpandauBerlinGermany
  2. 2.Department of SurgeryOtto-von-Guericke-UniversityMagdeburgGermany

Personalised recommendations