Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Relationship Between Tissue Ingrowth and Mesh Contraction

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

Abstract

Contraction is a well-documented phenomenon occurring within two months of mesh implantation. Its etiology is unknown, but it is suggested to occur as a result of inadequate tissue ingrowth into the mesh and has been associated with hernia recurrence. In continuation of our previous studies, we compared tissue ingrowth characteristics of large patches of polyester (PE) and heavyweight polypropylene (PP) and their effect on mesh contraction. The materials used were eight PE and eight PP meshes measuring 10 × 10 cm2. After random assignment to the implantation sites, the meshes were fixed to the abdominal wall fascia of swine using interrupted polypropylene sutures. A necropsy was performed three months after surgery for evaluation of mesh contraction/shrinkage. Using a tensiometer, tissue ingrowth was assessed by measuring the force necessary to detach the mesh from the fascia. Histologic analysis included inflammatory and fibroblastic reactions, scored on a 0–4 point scale. One swine developed a severe wound infection that involved two PP meshes and was therefore excluded from the study. The mean area covered by the PE meshes (87 ± 7 cm2) was significantly larger than the area covered by the PP meshes (67 ± 14 cm2) (p = 0.006). Tissue ingrowth force of the PE meshes (194 ± 37 N) had a trend toward being higher than that of the PP meshes (159 ± 43 N), although it did not reach statistical significance. There was no difference in histologic inflammatory and fibroblastic reactions between mesh types. There was a significant correlation between tissue ingrowth force and mesh size (p = 0.03, 95% CI: 0.05–0.84). Our results confirm those from previous studies in that mesh materials undergo significant contraction after suture fixation to the fascia. PE resulted in less contraction than polypropylene. A strong integration of the mesh into the tissue helps prevent this phenomenon, which is evidenced by a significant correlation between tissue ingrowth force and mesh size.

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

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. The EU Hernia Trialists Collaboration. Repair of groin hernia with synthetic mesh. Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ann. Surg. 2002;235:322–332

    Google Scholar 

  2. Vrijland WW, van den Tol MP, Luijendijk RW, et al. Randomized clinical trial of non-mesh versus mesh repair of primary inguinal hernia. Br. J. Surg. 2002;89:293–297

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. MRC Laparoscopic Groin Hernia Trial Group. Laparoscopic versus open repair of groin hernia: a randomized comparison. Lancet 1999;354:185–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Silich RC, McSherry CK. Spermatic granuloma: an uncommon complication of the tension-free repair. Surg. Endosc. 1996;10:537–539

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gray MR, Curtis JM, Elkington JS. Colovesical fistula after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Br. J. Surg. 1994:81:1213–1214

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Amid P. Classification of biomaterials, their related complications in abdominal wall hernia surgery. Hernia 1997;1:5–8

    Google Scholar 

  7. Schumpelick V, Arit G, Schlachetzki A, et al. Chronic inguinal pain after transperitoneal mesh implantation. Case report of net shrinkage. Chirurg 1998;69:489–491

    Google Scholar 

  8. Klinge U, Klosterhalfen B, Muller M, et al. Shrinking of polypropylene mesh in vivo: an experimental study in dogs. Eur. J. Surg. 1998;164:965–969

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gonzalez R, Ramshaw BJ. Comparison of tissue integration between polyester and polypropylene prostheses in the preperitoneal space. Am. Surg. 2003;69:471–477

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Klinge U, Conze J, Klosterhalfen B, et al. Changes in abdominal wall mechanics after mesh implantation. Experimental changes in mesh stability. Langenbecks Arch. Chic. 1996;381:323–332

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Schumpelick V, Klinge U, Welty G, et al. Meshes within the abdominal wall. Chirurg 1999;70:876–887

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Steed DL. Wound-healing trajectories. Surg. Clin. North. Am. 2003;83:547–555

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Di Vita G, Milano S, Frazzetta M, et al. Tension-free hernia repair is associated with an increase in inflammatory response markers against the mesh. Am J Surg 2000;180:203–207

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Beets GL, Go PM, van Mameren H. Foreign body reactions to monofilament and braided polypropylene mesh used as preperitoneal implants in pigs. Eur J Surg 1996;162:823–825

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Klinge U, Blosterhalfen B, Müller M, et al. Foreign body reaction to meshes used for the repair of abdominal wall hernias. Eur. J. Surg. 1999;165:665–673

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Schachtrupp A, Klinge U, Junge K, et al. Individual inflammatory response to human blood monocytes to mesh biomaterials. Br. J. Surg. 2003;90:114–120

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Bellón JM, Buján J, Contreras L, et al. Integration of biomaterials into abdominal wall: process of scar formation and macrophage response. Biomaterials 1995;16:381–387

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Klinge U, Klosterhalfen B, Birkenhauer V, et al. Impact of polymer pore size on the interface scar formation in a rat model. J. Surg. Res. 2002;103:208–214

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Junge K, Linge U, Rosch, et al. Functional and morphologic properties of a modified mesh for inguinal hernia repair. World J. Surg. 2002;26:1472–1480

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bellón JM, Buján J, Contreras LA, et al. Comparison of a new type of polytetrafluoroethylene patch (Mycro Mesh) and polypropylene prosthesis (Marlex) for repair of abdominal wall defects. J. Am. Coll. Surg. 1996;183:11–18

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lingen MW. Role of leukocytes and endothelial cells in the development of angiogenesis in inflammation and wound healing. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 2001;125:67–71

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Bellón JM, Contreras LA, Sabater C, et al. Pathologic and clinical aspects of repair of large incisional hernias after implant of a polytetrafluoroethylene prosthesis. World J. Surg. 1997;21:402–406

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Nien YD, Man YP, Tawil B, et al. Fibrinogen inhibits fibroblast-mediated contraction of collagen. Wound Repair Regen. 2003;11:380–385

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Marois Y, Cadi R, Gourdon J, et al. Biostability, inflammatory response, and healing characteristics of a fluoropassivated polyester-knit mesh in the repair of experimental abdominal hernias. Artif. Organs 2000;24:533–543

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Klosterhalfen B, Klinge U, Schumpelick V. Functional and morphological evaluation of different polypropylene mesh modifications for abdominal wall repair. Biomaterials 1998;19:2235–2246

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ferrando JM, Vidal J, Armengol M, et al. Early imaging of integration response to polypropylene mesh in abdominal wall by environmental scanning electron microscopy comparison of two placement techniques and correlation with tensiometric studies. World J. Surg. 2001;25:840–847

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Emory Endosurgery Unit and Hernia Institute, Emory University School of Medicine, 1364 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30322, USA

    Rodrigo Gonzalez M.D., Kim Fugate, David McClusky III M.D., E. Matt Ritter M.D., Andrew Lederman M.D., C. Daniel Smith M.D. & Bruce J. Ramshaw M.D.

  2. Department of Pathology, Emory Endosurgery Unit and Hernia Institute, Emory University School of Medicine, 1364 Clifton Road NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30322, USA

    Dirk Dillehay Ph.D.

  3. Division of Surgery, University of Missouri-Columbia, MC414 McHaney Hall, Columbia, MO 65212, USA

    Bruce J. Ramshaw M.D.

Authors
  1. Rodrigo Gonzalez M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kim Fugate
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David McClusky III M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. E. Matt Ritter M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Andrew Lederman M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Dirk Dillehay Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. C. Daniel Smith M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Bruce J. Ramshaw M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bruce J. Ramshaw M.D..

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gonzalez, R., Fugate, K., McClusky, D. et al. Relationship Between Tissue Ingrowth and Mesh Contraction. World J. Surg. 29, 1038–1043 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-7786-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-7786-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation