I read with interest the original article by Petter-Puchner et al. [1]. In it, the authors evaluated 20 Sprague-Dawley rats to study porcine small intestine submucosa implants randomizing sealant or sutures. Abscedation, encapsulation, and putrid seroma were observed in all samples; SIS was not detectable after 17 days.

I wish to point out the following considerations:

  • Porcine small intestine submucosa has a wide literature [2] with many experimental and clinical data and these adverse effects are not reported.

  • The study was based only on a limited sample of 20 rats.

  • Experiments were not repeated.

  • There was not a control group (it is not possible to have one of the two randomized group serving as control).

  • All samples had extensive infectious problems (in scientific models, 100% value is sometimes caused by methodological errors).

  • SIS is reabsorbed after 8–10 months [3, 4].

  • There are too many results totally discordant from the rest of the literature.

In summary, I think this study should be redone with a control group with polypropylene because there is a basic methodology problem.