Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2005
Influence of polyglecaprone 25 (Monocryl) supplementation on the biocompatibility of a polypropylene mesh for hernia repair.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
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.
Junge K, Rosch R, Krones C J, Klinge U, Mertens P R, Lynen P, Schumpelick V, Klosterhalfen B
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Supplementary polyglecaprone 25 (Monocryl) monofilaments were added to a lightweight pure monofilament polypropylene mesh (PP mesh) to improve intraoperative handling (PP+M mesh). This study was designed to evaluate the influence of this additional supplementation on the biocompatibility in a rodent animal model.
METHODS: Two mesh materials, a composite mesh (PP+M) and the pure polypropylene variant (PP), were compared after subcutaneous implantation in a standardized rat model. Histological analysis of the inflammatory response was performed after 28, 56 and 84 days of implantation. Material absorption, inflammatory tissue reaction, fibrosis and granuloma formation were investigated, as well as the percentage of proliferating and apoptotic cells at the interface.
RESULTS: Both mesh materials showed a slight foreign body reaction involving mainly macrophages and foreign body giant cells. Total absorption of the Monocryl filaments of the PP+M mesh occurred between 56 and 84 days of implantation. Both the inflammatory and the fibrotic reaction were decreased (n.s.) in the PP+M mesh group compared to the pure PP mesh. Whereas the percentage of proliferating cells showed no significant difference, the rate of apoptotic cells was significantly decreased in the PP+M mesh group over the whole implantation period.
CONCLUSION: Compared to the pure polypropylene mesh, our data confirm that the use of a polypropylene mesh supplemented with absorbable Monocryl filaments is feasible without additional short-term mesh-related complications in the experimental model or negative side effects on biocompatibility.
METHODS: Two mesh materials, a composite mesh (PP+M) and the pure polypropylene variant (PP), were compared after subcutaneous implantation in a standardized rat model. Histological analysis of the inflammatory response was performed after 28, 56 and 84 days of implantation. Material absorption, inflammatory tissue reaction, fibrosis and granuloma formation were investigated, as well as the percentage of proliferating and apoptotic cells at the interface.
RESULTS: Both mesh materials showed a slight foreign body reaction involving mainly macrophages and foreign body giant cells. Total absorption of the Monocryl filaments of the PP+M mesh occurred between 56 and 84 days of implantation. Both the inflammatory and the fibrotic reaction were decreased (n.s.) in the PP+M mesh group compared to the pure PP mesh. Whereas the percentage of proliferating cells showed no significant difference, the rate of apoptotic cells was significantly decreased in the PP+M mesh group over the whole implantation period.
CONCLUSION: Compared to the pure polypropylene mesh, our data confirm that the use of a polypropylene mesh supplemented with absorbable Monocryl filaments is feasible without additional short-term mesh-related complications in the experimental model or negative side effects on biocompatibility.