Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

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

  • Original article
  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background: Polypropylene (PP) meshes are currently being used in millions of operations for hernial repair. We tested several recently modified PP meshes to evaluate them in terms of their biocompatibility and handling characteristics during minimally invasive procedures. Methods: Four different PP meshes (a heavyweight PP, Atrium; a lightweight PP incorporating absorbable polyglactic acid, Vypro II; a lightweight PP, Parietene; and a titanium-coated lightweight PP, Ti-Mesh Extralight), all implanted using the endoscopic total extrapreperitoneal (TEP) technique, were investigated in groups comprising 11 pigs each. After 94 ± 5 days, the animals were autopsied and tissue samples were studied histologically, immunohistochemically, and electron-microscopically. Results: Whereas endoscopic handling of the Vypro II mesh proved difficult, the already good properties of the Atrium mesh were significantly improved on by Parietene and the Ti-Mesh. Clear differences were also found in the shrinkage characteristics of the implant materials. In comparison with Atrium (12%), Vypro II mesh shrinkage was significantly greater (28%), whereas Parietene (7%) and Ti-Mesh (5%) incurred less shrinkage. With regard to the chronic inflammatory reaction, the titanium-coated mesh showed a significantly lower inflammatory activity (13.1% partial volume [%PV] vs 34.1%PV and 29.0%PV) than the lightweight meshes Vypro II and Parietene, but—with the exception of the monocytic (0.2 vs 9.1, 5.1, and 7.9) and B-lymphocytic reaction (1.1 vs 18.0, 11.7, and 12.2)—no significant difference was seen in comparison with Atrium. The various mediators in the extracellular matrix (matrix metalloproteinases 1 [MMP-1 transforming growth factor beta [TGF-β], urokinase plasminogen activator [uPA], and type I collagen) tended to show the highest expression with Vypro II (13.6, 113.2, 132.7, and 139.5, respectively) and the lowest expression with Ti-Mesh (11.9, 68.5, 92.8, and 75.0, respectively). With regard to cell proliferation, Parietene and Ti-Mesh appeared to have slight advantages, but no differences were observed in the apoptotic rate. Conclusion: In our opinion, despite a reduction in material, Vipro II, on account of the inflammatory reaction, does not represent a true improvement over the meshes currently used for hernia repair. In comparison, the two lightweight PP patches are characterized by a more favorable foreign body reaction, with the titanium coating of the Ti-Mesh providing an additional advantage in terms of its biocompatibility.

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
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. PK Amid IL Lichtenstein AG Shulman M Hakakha (1995) ArticleTitleBiomaterials for “tension-free” hernioplasties and principles of their applications. Minerva Chir 50 821–826 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BymC2MfisVE%3D Occurrence Handle8587721

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. ML Baptista ME Bonsack I Felemovicius JP Delaney (2000) ArticleTitleAbdominal adhesions to prosthetic mesh evaluated by laparoscopy and electron microscopy. J Am Coll Surg 190 271–280 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S1072-7515(99)00277-X Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3c7ms1KitQ%3D%3D Occurrence Handle10703851

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. GL Beets PMNYH Go H van Mameren (1996) ArticleTitleForeign body reactions to monofilament and braided polypropylene mesh used as preperitoneal implants in pigs. Eur J Surg 162 823–825 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByiD1cfhslI%3D Occurrence Handle8934114

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. JM Bellon J Bujan LA Contreras A Carrera-San Martin F Jurado (1996) ArticleTitleComparison of a new type of polytetrafluoroethylene patch (Mycro mesh) and polypropylene prosthesis (Marlex) for repair of the abdominal wall defects. J Am Coll Surg 183 11–18 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BymB28bkt1M%3D Occurrence Handle8673302

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. JM Bellon F Jurado F Garcia-Moreno C Corrales A Carrera-San Martin J Bujan (2002) ArticleTitleHealing process induced by three composite prostheses in the repair of abdominal wall defects. J Biomed Mater Res 63 182–190 Occurrence Handle10.1002/jbm.10123.abs Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DC%2BD38Xisl2qur4%3D Occurrence Handle11870652

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. R Bittner (2000) ArticleTitleComment on Chirurg 2000;71:43–51. Pathology of traditional surgical nets for hernia repair after long-term implantation in humans. Chirurg 71 589–591 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s001040051144 Occurrence Handle10875021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. M Cristaldi M Pisacreta M Elli GL Vago PG Danelli GM Sampietro KM Taschieri (1997) ArticleTitleFemoro-popliteal by-pass occlusion following mesh-plug for prevascular femoral hernia repair. Hernia 1 197–199

    Google Scholar 

  8. S Dabrowiecki K Svanes J Lekven K Grong (1991) ArticleTitleTissue reaction to polypropylene mesh: a study of oedema, blood flow, and inflammation in the abdominal wall. Eur Surg Res 23 240–249 Occurrence Handle1838331

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. BM Ghadimi C Langer H Becker (2002) ArticleTitleThe carcinogenic potential of biomaterials in hernia surgery. Chirurg 73 833–838

    Google Scholar 

  10. HS Goldstein (1999) ArticleTitleSelecting the right mesh. Hernia 3 23–26

    Google Scholar 

  11. FH Greca JB de Paula ML Biondo-Simoes FD da Costa AP da Silva S Time A Mansur (2001) ArticleTitleThe influence of differing pore sizes on biocompatibility of two polypropylene meshes in the repair of abdominal defects—experimental study in dogs. Hernia 5 59–64 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3MvmtFerug%3D%3D Occurrence Handle11505649

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. A Hamy J Paineau L Savigny N Vasse J Visset (1997) ArticleTitleSigmoid perforation, an exceptional late complication of peritoneal prosthesis for treatment of inguinal hernia. Int Surg 82 307–308 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1c%2FjvFKnuw%3D%3D Occurrence Handle9372380

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. S Hengirmen F Aksoy H Sencer E Olcay (19xy) ArticleTitleComparison of meshes for the repair of experimental abdominal wall defects. J Invest Surg 11 315–325

    Google Scholar 

  14. K Junge U Klinge R Rosch B Klosterhalfen V Schumpelick (2002) ArticleTitleFunctional and morphological properties of a modified mesh for inguinal hernia repair. World J Surg 26 1472–1480 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s00268-002-6444-z Occurrence Handle12297937

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. EE Katz RV Patel MH Sokoloff T Vargish CB Brendler (2002) ArticleTitleBilateral laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair can complicate subsequent radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol 167 637–638 Occurrence Handle11792935

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. U Klinge B Klosterhalfen J Conze W Limberg B Obolenski P Öttinger V Schumpelick (2002) ArticleTitleModified mesh for hernia repair that is adapted to the physiology of the abdominal wall. Eur J Surg 164 951–960 Occurrence Handle10.1080/110241598750005138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. U Klinge B Klosterhalfen M Müller AP Öttinger V Schumpelick (1998) ArticleTitleShrinking of polypropylene mesh in vivo: an experimental study in dogs. Eur J Surg 164 965–969 Occurrence Handle10029393

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. U Klinge V Schumpelick B Klosterhalfen (2001) ArticleTitleFunctional assessment and tissue response of short- and long-term absorbable surgical meshes. Biomaterials 22 1415–1424 Occurrence Handle11336316

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. U Klinge B Klosterhalfen V Birkenhauer K Junge J Conze V Schumpelick (2002) ArticleTitleImpact of polymer pore size on the interface scar formation in a rat model. J Surg Res 103 208–214 Occurrence Handle10.1006/jsre.2002.6358 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DC%2BD38XitlGnt7k%3D Occurrence Handle11922736

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. B Klosterhalfen U Klinge B Hermanns V Schumpelick (2000) ArticleTitlePathology of traditional surgical nets for hernia repair after long-term implantation in humans. Chirurg 71 43–51 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3c7ivFymug%3D%3D Occurrence Handle10663001

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. MTT Knook AC van Rosmalen BE Yoder GJ Kleinrensink CJ Snijders CWN Looman CJ van Steensel (2001) ArticleTitleOptimal mesh size for endoscopic inguinal hernia repair: a study in a porcine model. Surg Endosc 15 1471–1477 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s004640000244 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD383ivVSrsQ%3D%3D Occurrence Handle11965468

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. NW Law (1990) ArticleTitleComparison of polypropylene mesh, expanded polytetrafluoroethylene patch and polyglycolic acid mesh for the repair of experimental abdominal wall defects. Acta Chir Scand 156 759–762 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:By6C28rksVY%3D Occurrence Handle1963726

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Y Marois R Cadi J Gourdon N Fatouraee MW King Z Zhong R Guidoin (2000) ArticleTitleBiostability, inflammatory response, and healing characteristics of a fluoropassivated polyester-knit mesh in the repair of experimental abdominal hernias. Artif Organs 24 533–543 Occurrence Handle10.1046/j.1525-1594.2000.06547.x Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3cvmtF2qsw%3D%3D Occurrence Handle10916064

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. GJ Morris-Stiff LE Hughes (1998) ArticleTitleThe outcomes of nonabsorbable mesh placed within the abdominal cavity: literature review and clinical experience. J Am Coll Surg 186 352–376 Occurrence Handle9510268

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. V Schumpelick B Klosterhalfen M Müller U Klinge (1999) ArticleTitleMinimized polypropylene mesh for preperitoneal net plasty (PNP) of incisional hernias. Chirurg 70 422–430 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1M3otlamsQ%3D%3D Occurrence Handle10354839

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. V Schumpelick U Klinge G Welty B Klosterhalfen (1999) ArticleTitleMeshes within the abdominal wall. Chirurg 70 876–887 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s001040050737 Occurrence Handle10460281

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. RC Silich CK McSherry (1996) ArticleTitleSpermatic granuloma: an uncommon complication of the tension-free hernia repair. Surg Endosc 10 537–539

    Google Scholar 

  28. C Tamme H Scheidbach C Hampe C Schneider F Köckerling (2002) ArticleTitleTotally extraperitoneal endoscopic inguinal hernia repair (TEP): results of 5,203 hernia repairs. Surg Endosc 17 190–195 (Epub2002 Dec4) Occurrence Handle10.1007/s00464-002-8905-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. P Thomas B Summer B Przybilla (2001) ArticleTitleAllergological aspects of biocompatibility of metal implant. Dt Ärzteblatt 98 A1971–A1974

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Ethicon, Gmbh, Norderstedt, Germany; Sofradim International, Trevoux, France; and GfE, Medizintechnik Gmbh, Nürnberg, Germany. Special thanks to F. Pölzing, DVM (FiM, Beichlingen, Germany) for animal care and U. Schmidt, Dipl.-Math. (Institute for Biometry and Statistics. Otto von Guericke University–Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany) for statistical support. Thanks are also due to M. Pass for excellent technical assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Otto von Guericke University–Magdeburg, Leipziger Strasse 44, D-39120 Magdeburg, Germany

    H. Scheidbach & H. Lippert

  2. Department of Surgery and Center for Minimally Invasive Surgery, Hannover Hospital–Siloah, Roesebeckstrasse 15, D-30449 Hannover, Germany

    C. Tamme & F. Köckerling

  3. Department of Pathology, University of Leipzig, Liebigstrasse 26, D-04103 Leipzig, Germany

    A. Tannapfel

Authors
  1. H. Scheidbach
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. C. Tamme
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. Tannapfel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. H. Lippert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. F. Köckerling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Scheidbach, H., Tamme, C., Tannapfel, A. et al. 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, 211–220 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-003-8113-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-003-8113-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation