European surgical research. Europaische chirurgische Forschung. Recherches chirurgicales europeennes · 2009
Experimental comparison of meshes for rectal prolapse surgery.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Calişkan Cemil, Denizli A, Makay O, Firat O, Tanyalcin T, Alkanat M, Korkut M A
Аннотация
AIM: The aim of this experimental study is to investigate the foreign body tissue created by the meshes that are used for rectopexy.
METHOD: Sixty rats were divided equally into 5 groups. Four mesh types (Surgipro, Ivalon, Gore-Tex and Vypro) were implanted into the retroperitoneal area except for the sham group. After a 5-week follow-up period, all animals were sacrificed. Specimens were evaluated macroscopically by using scoring systems and biochemically by determining tissue hydroxyproline and nitric oxide levels.
RESULTS: The most evident foreign body reaction was observed in the Ivalon group, which showed higher 'macroscopic adhesion' scores (p < 0.005), although there were no significant differences in tissue hydroxyproline and nitric oxide levels between the groups (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: In rectal prolapse surgery, selecting the ideal mesh type is unclear, depending on evidence-based results. In the present study, we could not prove which mesh was definitely superior to the other, macroscopically, histologically and biochemically. The findings of this experimental rat model suggest that implantation of all 4 types of meshes are suitable for posterior rectopexy.
METHOD: Sixty rats were divided equally into 5 groups. Four mesh types (Surgipro, Ivalon, Gore-Tex and Vypro) were implanted into the retroperitoneal area except for the sham group. After a 5-week follow-up period, all animals were sacrificed. Specimens were evaluated macroscopically by using scoring systems and biochemically by determining tissue hydroxyproline and nitric oxide levels.
RESULTS: The most evident foreign body reaction was observed in the Ivalon group, which showed higher 'macroscopic adhesion' scores (p < 0.005), although there were no significant differences in tissue hydroxyproline and nitric oxide levels between the groups (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: In rectal prolapse surgery, selecting the ideal mesh type is unclear, depending on evidence-based results. In the present study, we could not prove which mesh was definitely superior to the other, macroscopically, histologically and biochemically. The findings of this experimental rat model suggest that implantation of all 4 types of meshes are suitable for posterior rectopexy.