Summary
The development of mesh is described. Current popular prostheses such as polyester, polytetrafluroethylene (PTFE) and polypropylene are reviewed. Chemical, polymer, and textile engineers design prostheses with various characteristics and qualities. These properties are compared according to the American Standard and Testing Methods (ASTM). Absorbable mesh does not remain in the wound long enough for adequate collagen to be deposited. Multifilament mesh can harbor bacteria. Monofilament mesh is the most popular presently in use with the various types of polypropylene having different characteristic advantages.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amid PK (1997) Classification of biomaterials and their related complications in abdominal wall hernia surgery. Hernia 1: 15–21
Amid PK, Shulman AG, Lichtenstein IL (1992) Selecting synthetic mesh for the repair of groin hernia. Postgraduate Gen Surg 4, 150–155
Annual Book of ASTM Standards (1975, 1980) Volume 07.01.02
Berliner SD (1989) Biomaterials in hernia repair. In: LM Nyhus, RE Gordon (eds) Hernia. Lippincott, New York, p. 541
Bobyn JD, Wilson GJ, McGregor DC, Pilliar RM, Weatherly GC (1982) Effect of pore size on the peel strength of attachment of fibrous tissue to porous-surfaced implants. J Biomed Mater Res 571–584
Cerise E, Busuttil R, Craighead C, Opden W (1975) The use of Mersilene mesh in repairs of abdominal wall hernias. Ann Surg 181: 728–734
Chu CC, Welch L (1985) Characterization of morphologic and mechanical properties of surgical mesh fabrics. J Biomed Mat Research 19: 903–916
Johnson-Nurse C, Jenkins DHR (1980) The use of flexible carbon fiber in the repair of experimental large abdominal incisional hernia. Br J Surg 67: 135–137
King MW, Soares B, Guidoin R (1994) The chemical, physical and structural porperties of synthetic biomaterials used in hernia repair. In: R Bendavid (ed) Prosthesis and abdominal wall hernias. Landes, Austin, pp. 191–206
Lamb JP, Vitale T, Kamenski DL (1983) Comparative evaluation of synthetic meshes used for abdominal replacement. Surg 93: 643–648
Law N, Ellis H (1991) A comarison of polypropylene mesh and expanded PTFE patch for the repair of contaminated abdominal wall defects. Surg 109: 652
Lichenstein IL, Shulman AG, Amid PK, Monthlor MM (1989) The tension-free henioplasty. Am J Surg 157: 188–193
Martin RE, Surech S, Classen JN (1982) Polypropylene mesh in 450 hernia repair evaluation of wound infection. Contemporary Surg 20: 46–48
Rath AM, Zhang J, Amouroux J, Chevrel JP (1996) Les prothèses pariétales abdominales. Etude biomécanique et histologique. Chirugie 121: 253–265
Tyrell J, Silberman H, Chandrasoma P, Niland J (1989) Absorbable versus permanent mesh in abdominal operations. SGO 168: 227–233
Usher FC (1959) A new plastic prosthesis for repairing tissue defects of the chest and abdominal wall. Am J Surg 97: 629
Usher FC, Fries JC, Ochsner JL, Tuttle LLD Jr (1959) Marlex mesh a new plastic mesh for replacing tissue defects II. Arch Surg 78: 138–145
Wagner M (1970) Evaluation of diverse plastic and cutis prosthese in a growing host. SG & O 130: 1077
Zisman WA (1963) Relation of equilibrium contact angle to liquid and solid constitution. The 144th Meeting of the American Chemical Society, LA, CA, April 2–3
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Goldstein, H.S. Selecting the right mesh. Hernia 3, 23–26 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01576737
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01576737