Non-absorbable prosthetic meshes: which is the best option in the repair of abdominal wall defects?
The mechanical properties and macroscopic behaviour of non-absorbable materials have been widely studied. Nevertheless, biological tissue response to contact with these prostheses is not well-known. Our purpose was to compare the microscopic behaviour of two non-absorbable materials. Polypropylene and mersilene meshes were implanted on 36 female Wistar rats each (PPL and ME groups) . Six animals per group were sequentially sacrificed at 1, 2, 3, 5, 10 and 15 weeks. Global cell density and number of polymorphonuclear leukocytes, giant cells, fibroblasts and histiocytes were compared for every studied phase. The polypropylene group showed higher cell density and polymorphonuclear response in the initial phases, while scores for giant cells were higher in the mersilene group. Fibrohistiocytic reaction was increased in the polypropylene group. Polypropylene tends to provoke higher acute inflammatory reaction and connective tissue formation than mersilene. The latter induces higher foreign body reaction.
Ortiz-Oshiro
E
E
Department of General and Digestive Surgery I, Hospital Clínico Universitario San Carlos, Madrid, Spain.
Villalta
G C
GC
Furió-Bacete
V
V
Martínez
J M
JM
Ortega López
D
D
Fdez-Represa
J A
JA
D000009:Abdominal Muscles / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery*; D000818:Animals; D005260:Female; D005549:Foreign-Body Reaction / Q000473:pathology; D011093:Polyethylene Terephthalates; D011126:Polypropylenes; D051381:Rats; D017208:Rats, Wistar; D013526:Surgical Mesh
D011093:Polyethylene Terephthalates; D011126:Polypropylenes; C025539:Lavsan