Peritoneal adhesions to prosthetic materials: An experimental comparative study of treated and untreated polypropylene meshes placed in the abdominal cavity

Luca Ansaloni, Fausto Catena, Federico Coccolini, Milena Fini, Filippo Gazzotti, Roberto Giardino, Antonio Daniele Pinna

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Frequently, hernia repair requires polypropylene (PP) meshes, which carry a well-known adhesiogenic risk when placed in contact to the intestine. The aim of this experimental study in a rat model was to assess the role of some materials, when combined with PP, in preventing the adhesions' formation. Materials and Methods: Sixty male Sprague-Dawley rats were assigned to five groups for intraperitoneal mesh placement: untreated PP, PP+polyurethane (PP+PU), PP+Surgisis (PP+SIS), PP+expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (PP+ePTFE), and a control group without mesh. Twenty-one days and 3 and 6 months after the operation, an assessment of adhesion formation was performed, scoring adhesions in terms of extent and type and the adhesion index (AI; product of adhesions' extent and type). Results: No significant difference was seen between PP+SIS, PP+PU, and control groups in adhesions extent/quality and in AI. The PP+SIS group had significantly lower adhesions' quality value and AI than PP+ePTFE. PP+PU had significantly lower adhesions' extent/quality value and AI than PP+ePTFE. The control group had adhesions with significantly lower extent/quality and AI than PP+ePTFE. The PP group had significantly more and denser adhesions, compared to PP+ePTFE, as well as a significantly higher AI. Conclusions: Adhesions' incidence is reduced by using treated PP meshes. PP+PU and PP+SIS were superior to PP+ePTFE in adhesion prevention.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)369-374
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques
Volume19
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 1 2009

Fingerprint

Abdominal Cavity
Polypropylenes
Control Groups
Polyurethanes
Herniorrhaphy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Peritoneal adhesions to prosthetic materials : An experimental comparative study of treated and untreated polypropylene meshes placed in the abdominal cavity. / Ansaloni, Luca; Catena, Fausto; Coccolini, Federico; Fini, Milena; Gazzotti, Filippo; Giardino, Roberto; Pinna, Antonio Daniele.

In: Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques, Vol. 19, No. 3, 01.06.2009, p. 369-374.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ansaloni, Luca ; Catena, Fausto ; Coccolini, Federico ; Fini, Milena ; Gazzotti, Filippo ; Giardino, Roberto ; Pinna, Antonio Daniele. / Peritoneal adhesions to prosthetic materials : An experimental comparative study of treated and untreated polypropylene meshes placed in the abdominal cavity. In: Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques. 2009 ; Vol. 19, No. 3. pp. 369-374.
@article{3f2779fa886c45e9ae42148857f3c8d8,
title = "Peritoneal adhesions to prosthetic materials: An experimental comparative study of treated and untreated polypropylene meshes placed in the abdominal cavity",
abstract = "Background: Frequently, hernia repair requires polypropylene (PP) meshes, which carry a well-known adhesiogenic risk when placed in contact to the intestine. The aim of this experimental study in a rat model was to assess the role of some materials, when combined with PP, in preventing the adhesions' formation. Materials and Methods: Sixty male Sprague-Dawley rats were assigned to five groups for intraperitoneal mesh placement: untreated PP, PP+polyurethane (PP+PU), PP+Surgisis (PP+SIS), PP+expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (PP+ePTFE), and a control group without mesh. Twenty-one days and 3 and 6 months after the operation, an assessment of adhesion formation was performed, scoring adhesions in terms of extent and type and the adhesion index (AI; product of adhesions' extent and type). Results: No significant difference was seen between PP+SIS, PP+PU, and control groups in adhesions extent/quality and in AI. The PP+SIS group had significantly lower adhesions' quality value and AI than PP+ePTFE. PP+PU had significantly lower adhesions' extent/quality value and AI than PP+ePTFE. The control group had adhesions with significantly lower extent/quality and AI than PP+ePTFE. The PP group had significantly more and denser adhesions, compared to PP+ePTFE, as well as a significantly higher AI. Conclusions: Adhesions' incidence is reduced by using treated PP meshes. PP+PU and PP+SIS were superior to PP+ePTFE in adhesion prevention.",
author = "Luca Ansaloni and Fausto Catena and Federico Coccolini and Milena Fini and Filippo Gazzotti and Roberto Giardino and Pinna, {Antonio Daniele}",
year = "2009",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1089/lap.2008.0366",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "369--374",
journal = "Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques - Part A",
issn = "1092-6429",
publisher = "Mary Ann Liebert Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Peritoneal adhesions to prosthetic materials

T2 - An experimental comparative study of treated and untreated polypropylene meshes placed in the abdominal cavity

AU - Ansaloni, Luca

AU - Catena, Fausto

AU - Coccolini, Federico

AU - Fini, Milena

AU - Gazzotti, Filippo

AU - Giardino, Roberto

AU - Pinna, Antonio Daniele

PY - 2009/6/1

Y1 - 2009/6/1

N2 - Background: Frequently, hernia repair requires polypropylene (PP) meshes, which carry a well-known adhesiogenic risk when placed in contact to the intestine. The aim of this experimental study in a rat model was to assess the role of some materials, when combined with PP, in preventing the adhesions' formation. Materials and Methods: Sixty male Sprague-Dawley rats were assigned to five groups for intraperitoneal mesh placement: untreated PP, PP+polyurethane (PP+PU), PP+Surgisis (PP+SIS), PP+expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (PP+ePTFE), and a control group without mesh. Twenty-one days and 3 and 6 months after the operation, an assessment of adhesion formation was performed, scoring adhesions in terms of extent and type and the adhesion index (AI; product of adhesions' extent and type). Results: No significant difference was seen between PP+SIS, PP+PU, and control groups in adhesions extent/quality and in AI. The PP+SIS group had significantly lower adhesions' quality value and AI than PP+ePTFE. PP+PU had significantly lower adhesions' extent/quality value and AI than PP+ePTFE. The control group had adhesions with significantly lower extent/quality and AI than PP+ePTFE. The PP group had significantly more and denser adhesions, compared to PP+ePTFE, as well as a significantly higher AI. Conclusions: Adhesions' incidence is reduced by using treated PP meshes. PP+PU and PP+SIS were superior to PP+ePTFE in adhesion prevention.

AB - Background: Frequently, hernia repair requires polypropylene (PP) meshes, which carry a well-known adhesiogenic risk when placed in contact to the intestine. The aim of this experimental study in a rat model was to assess the role of some materials, when combined with PP, in preventing the adhesions' formation. Materials and Methods: Sixty male Sprague-Dawley rats were assigned to five groups for intraperitoneal mesh placement: untreated PP, PP+polyurethane (PP+PU), PP+Surgisis (PP+SIS), PP+expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (PP+ePTFE), and a control group without mesh. Twenty-one days and 3 and 6 months after the operation, an assessment of adhesion formation was performed, scoring adhesions in terms of extent and type and the adhesion index (AI; product of adhesions' extent and type). Results: No significant difference was seen between PP+SIS, PP+PU, and control groups in adhesions extent/quality and in AI. The PP+SIS group had significantly lower adhesions' quality value and AI than PP+ePTFE. PP+PU had significantly lower adhesions' extent/quality value and AI than PP+ePTFE. The control group had adhesions with significantly lower extent/quality and AI than PP+ePTFE. The PP group had significantly more and denser adhesions, compared to PP+ePTFE, as well as a significantly higher AI. Conclusions: Adhesions' incidence is reduced by using treated PP meshes. PP+PU and PP+SIS were superior to PP+ePTFE in adhesion prevention.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70349207605&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=70349207605&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1089/lap.2008.0366

DO - 10.1089/lap.2008.0366

M3 - Article

C2 - 19405799

AN - SCOPUS:70349207605

VL - 19

SP - 369

EP - 374

JO - Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques - Part A

JF - Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques - Part A

SN - 1092-6429

IS - 3

ER -