Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparative study of four different types of intraperitoneal mesh prostheses in rats
Fuziy, Rogério Aoki; Artigiani Neto, Ricardo; Caetano Junior, Elesiario Marques; Alves, Ana Karina Soares; Lopes Filho, Gaspar Jesus; Linhares, Marcelo Moura.
Affiliation
  • Fuziy, Rogério Aoki; Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Department of Surgery. Division of Surgical Gastroenterology. Postgraduate Program in Interdisciplinary Surgical Sciences. São Paulo. Brasil
  • Artigiani Neto, Ricardo; Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Department of Surgery. Division of Surgical Gastroenterology. São Paulo. Brasil
  • Caetano Junior, Elesiario Marques; Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Department of Surgery. Division of Surgical Gastroenterology. São Paulo. Brasil
  • Alves, Ana Karina Soares; Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Department of Surgery. Division of Surgical Gastroenterology. São Paulo. Brasil
  • Lopes Filho, Gaspar Jesus; Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Department of Surgery. Division of Surgical Gastroenterology. São Paulo. Brasil
  • Linhares, Marcelo Moura; Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Department of Surgery. Division of Surgical Gastroenterology. São Paulo. Brasil
Acta cir. bras. ; 34(7): e201900703, 2019. ilus, tab
Article in En | VETINDEX | ID: vti-23659
Responsible library: BR68.1
Localization: BR68.1
ABSTRACT

Purpose:

To compare four types of mesh regarding visceral adhesions, inflammatory response and incorporation.

Methods:

Sixty Wistar rats were divided into four groups, with different meshes implanted intraperitoneally polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE group); polypropylene with polydioxanone and oxidized cellulose (PCD); polypropylene (PM) and polypropylene with silicone (PMS). The variables analyzed were area covered by adhesions, incorporation of the mesh and inflammatory reaction (evaluated histologically and by COX2 immunochemistry).

Results:

The PMS group had the lowest adhesion area (63.1%) and grade 1 adhesions. The ePTFE and PM groups presented almost the total area of their surface covered by adherences (99.8% and 97.7% respectively).The group ePTFE had the highest percentage of area without incorporation (42%; p <0.001) with no difference between the other meshes. The PMS group had the best incorporation rate. And the histological analysis revealed that the inflammation scores were significantly different.

Conclusions:

The PM mesh had higher density of adherences, larger area of adherences, adherences to organs and percentage of incorporation. ePTFE had the higher area of adherences and lower incorporation. The PMS mesh performed best in the inflammation score, had a higher incorporation and lower area of adherences, and it was considered the best type of mesh.(AU)
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Database: VETINDEX Main subject: Surgical Mesh / Cyclooxygenase 2 / Incisional Hernia Limits: Animals Language: En Journal: Acta cir. bras. Year: 2019 Document type: Article

Full text: 1 Database: VETINDEX Main subject: Surgical Mesh / Cyclooxygenase 2 / Incisional Hernia Limits: Animals Language: En Journal: Acta cir. bras. Year: 2019 Document type: Article