Support of the aortic wall: a histological study in sheep comparing a macroporous mesh with low-porosity vascular graft of the same polyethylene terephthalate material.

OBJECTIVES

Wrapping with various materials was an early treatment for aortic aneurysms. Wrapping with low-porosity vascular grafts has been associated with graft migration and vascular erosion. An alternative is to use a macroporous mesh (MPM) made of the same polymer (polyethylene terephalate). We compared the histological outcome 1 year after wrapping sheep aortas with low-porosity grafts versus MPM fabrics.

METHODS

The 2 different fabrics were wrapped around the aorta of 3 sheep. After 1 year the aortas were excised. The 2 wrapped segments of aorta were compared with each other and control aorta. Histological examinations and measurements were made of the layers of the aortic wall in 36 prespecified locations in each of the 3 sheep.

RESULTS

Both fabrics were consistently surrounded by foreign body reaction and well-vascularized fibrosis. This was more pronounced with the low-porosity vascular graft material which was poorly incorporated and caused buckling at the transition between wrapped and unwrapped aorta. Conversely, the MPM was fully incorporated, resulting in a composite mesh/biological aortic wall. There was reduction of medial thickness with both materials but it was locally more extreme due to the corrugations in the vascular graft material. The findings were consistent between sampled locations and were similar in the 3 animals.

CONCLUSIONS

The different porosity and rigidity of the materials influences their incorporation into the aortic wall. The incorporation of the pliable MPM precludes the complications of migration and erosion which are seen after wrapping with low-porosity prosthetic vascular graft material.