Tissue integration and inflammatory reaction in full-thickness abdominal wall repair using an innovative composite mesh

Pascual, Gemma; Sotomayor, Sandra; Rodrı́guez, Marta; Bayon, Yves; Bellón, Juan M.

doi:10.1007/s10029-015-1383-4

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 34 publications

(46 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In yet another experimental study, seroma was often observed with Physiomesh, whereby seromas were found trapped between the 2 poliglecaprone films. 34 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Importance of Registries in the Postmarketing Surveillance of Surgical Meshes

Köckerling

Simon²,

Hukauf

et al. 2018

Annals of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective:To assess the role of registries in the postmarketing surveillance of surgical meshes.Background:To date, surgical meshes are classified as group II medical devices. Class II devices do not require premarket clearance by clinical studies. Ethicon initiated a voluntary market withdrawal of Physiomesh for laparoscopic use after an analysis of unpublished data from the 2 large independent hernia registries—Herniamed German Registry and Danish Hernia Database. This paper now presents the relevant data from the Herniamed Registry.Methods:The present analysis compares the prospective perioperative and 1-year follow-up data collected for all patients with incisional hernia who had undergone elective laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair either with Physiomesh (n = 1380) or with other meshes recommended in the guidelines (n = 3834).Results:Patients with Physiomesh repair had a markedly higher recurrence rate compared with the other recommended meshes (12.0% vs 5.0%; P < 0.001). In the multivariable analysis, the recurrence rate was highly significantly influenced by the mesh type used (P < 0.001). If Physiomesh was used, that led to a highly significant increase in the recurrence rate on 1-year follow-up (odds ratio 2.570, 95% CI 2.057, 3.210). The mesh type used also had a significant influence on chronic pain rates.Conclusions:The importance of real-world data for postmarketing surveillance of surgical meshes has been demonstrated in this registry-based study. Randomized controlled trials are needed for premarket approval of new devices. The role of sponsorship of device studies by the manufacturing company must be taken into account.

show abstract

“…In yet another experimental study, seroma was often observed with Physiomesh, whereby seromas were found trapped between the 2 poliglecaprone films. 34 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Importance of Registries in the Postmarketing Surveillance of Surgical Meshes

Köckerling

Simon²,

Hukauf

et al. 2018

Annals of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This property could be related to the degradation of the collagen film. At 90 days after implantation, the composite mesh was well integrated with the abdominal wall, which shows the de novo formation of peritoneal tissue with vascularization and minimal inflammation [16].…”

Section: Biological Scaffolds For Abdominal Wall Repairmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biological Scaffolds for Abdominal Wall Repair: Future in Clinical Application?

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Millions of abdominal wall repair procedures are performed each year for primary and incisional hernias both in the European Union and in the United States with extremely high costs. Synthetic meshes approved for augmenting abdominal wall repair provide adequate mechanical support but have significant drawbacks (seroma formation, adhesion to viscera, stiffness of abdominal wall, and infection). Biologic scaffolds (i.e., derived from naturally occurring materials) represent an alternative to synthetic surgical meshes and are less sensitive to infection. Among biologic scaffolds, extracellular matrix scaffolds promote stem/progenitor cell recruitment in models of tissue remodeling and, in the specific application of abdominal wall repair, have enough mechanical strength to support the repair. However, many concerns remain about the use of these scaffolds in the clinic due to their higher cost of production compared with synthetic meshes, despite having the same recurrence rate. The present review aims to highlight the pros and cons of using biologic scaffolds as surgical devices for abdominal wall repair and present possible improvements to widen their use in clinical practice.

show abstract

“…The observed increased recurrence rate is attributed to poor mesh integration into the abdominal wall. The postulated underlying cause is the presence of anti-adhesion coating on both sides of the mesh, which may delay its integration into the inner surface of the abdominal wall [20,21]. As a result, the mesh detaches easily from the abdominal wall during reoperation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Outcomes of bridging versus mesh augmentation in laparoscopic repair of small and medium midline ventral hernias

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair is generally safe and is associated with the low recurrence rate. Closure of fascial defects before mesh insertion offers better treatment outcomes. Non-closure of fascial defects with only bridging of the hernia defect (sIPOM) causes more frequent recurrence and bulging. As a result, patient satisfaction with treatment is lower, and they are concerned about hernia recurrence.

show abstract

Tissue integration and inflammatory reaction in full-thickness abdominal wall repair using an innovative composite mesh

Abstract: Ncm could be an appropriate candidate to improve clinical outcome showing the lower development of seroma and optimal tissue integration with minimal pro-inflammatory cytokine response over time and consistent pro-wound healing cytokine expression.

Cited by 7 publications

References 34 publications

The Importance of Registries in the Postmarketing Surveillance of Surgical Meshes

The Importance of Registries in the Postmarketing Surveillance of Surgical Meshes

Biological Scaffolds for Abdominal Wall Repair: Future in Clinical Application?

Outcomes of bridging versus mesh augmentation in laparoscopic repair of small and medium midline ventral hernias

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About