Short-term strength of non-penetrating mesh fixation: LifeMesh™, Tisseel™, and ProGrip™

Self-adhesive hydrogel meshes reduce tissue incorporation and mechanical behavior versus microgrips self-fixation: a preclinical study

Purpose

Atraumatic mesh fixation for abdominal hernia repair has been developed to avoid the disadvantages of classical fixation with sutures, which is considered a cause of chronic pain and discomfort. This study was designed to analyze, in the short and medium term, the biological and mechanical behavior of two self-fixing meshes compared to that of a polypropylene (PP) mesh fixed with a cyanoacrylate (CA) tissue adhesive.

Methods

Partial abdominal wall defects (6 × 4 cm) were created in New Zealand rabbits (n = 36) and repaired using a self-adhesive hydrogel mesh (Adhesix™), a self-gripping mesh (ProGrip™) or a PP mesh fixed with CA (Surgipro™ CA). After 14 and 90 days, the host tissue incorporation, macrophage response and biomechanical strength were examined.

Results

At 14 and 90 days, the ProGrip and Surgipro CA meshes showed good host tissue incorporation; however, the Adhesix implants presented poor integration, seroma formation and a higher degree of shrinkage. The Adhesix hydrogel was completely reabsorbed at 14 days, whereas ProGrip microhooks were observed at all study times. The macrophage response was higher in the ProGrip and Surgipro CA groups at 14 and 90 days, respectively, and decreased over time. At 90 days, the ProGrip implants showed the highest tensile strength values and the Adhesix implants showed the highest failure stretch.

Conclusion

Meshes with mechanical microgrip self-fixation (ProGrip) show better biological and mechanical behavior than those with adhesive hydrogel (Adhesix) in a preclinical model of abdominal hernia repair in rabbits.

Strategies for Mesh Fixation in Abdominal Wall Reconstruction: Concepts and Techniques

SUMMARY

Ventral hernias have numerous causes, ranging from sequelae of surgical procedures to congenital deformities. Patients suffering from these hernias experience a reduced quality of life through pain, associated complications, and physical disfigurement. Therefore, it is important to provide these patients with a steadfast repair that restores functionality and native anatomy. To do this, techniques and materials for abdominal wall reconstruction have advanced throughout the decades, leading to durable surgical repairs. At the cornerstone of this lies the use of mesh. When providing abdominal wall reconstruction, a surgeon must make many decisions with regard to mesh use. Along with the type of mesh and plane of placement of mesh, a surgeon must decide on the method of mesh fixation. Fixation of mesh provides an equal distribution of tension and a more robust tissue-mesh interface, which promotes integration. There exist numerous modalities for mesh fixation, each with its own benefits and drawbacks. This Special Topic article aims to compare and contrast methods of mesh fixation in terms of strength of fixation, clinical outcomes, and cost-effectiveness. Methods included in this review are suture, tack, fibrin glue, mesh strip, and self-adhering modes of fixation.

[Outcomes of various techniques of mesh prosthesis fixation in laparoscopic hernia repair]

OBJECTIVE

To compare early and long-term results of various mesh prosthesis fixation methods in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

It is a prospective clinical non-randomized trial. The study included 212 patients. Conventional stapler fixation (112 patients), self-gripping mesh implants (48 patients) and n-butyl cyanoacrylate adhesive fixation (52 patients) were compared. We estimated surgery time, pain syndrome severity in early and long-term postoperative period, postoperative morbidity and recurrence rate were evaluated.

RESULTS

Early postoperative morbidity, activation of patients and hospital-stay were similar in all groups. Pain syndrome within 6 postoperative hours in the first group exceeded the same parameter in the second group by 1.23 times (95% CI 1.15-1.31, p<0.05) and by 1.19 times in the third group (95% CI 1.12-1.26, p<0.05). Within 12 hours, pain syndrome in the first group was 1.27 times more severe compared to the third group (95% CI 1.20-1.34, p<0.05). Pain syndrome in long-term period was similar in all groups. In the first group, one recurrence was detected (0.9%).

CONCLUSION

There were no significant between-group differences. However, we found the correlation of postoperative pain syndrome with mesh implant fixation technique.

Mesh fixation using novel bio-adhesive coating compared to tack fixation for IPOM hernia repair: in vivo evaluation in a porcine model

BACKGROUND

Mesh fixation in hernia repair is currently based on penetrating sutures or anchors, with proven early and late complications such as pain, adhesions, erosions, and anchor migration. In an attempt to reduce these complications, a bio-adhesive-based self-fixation system was developed. The purpose of this study was to assess the performance and safety of this novel self-adhesive mesh (LifeMesh™) by comparing it with standard tack fixation.

METHODS

A full-thickness abdominal wall defect was created bilaterally in 24 pigs. The defects were measured 14 days later, and laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) repairs were performed. In each animal, both LifeMesh and a titanium tack-fixed control, either uncoated polypropylene mesh (PP) or composite mesh (Symbotex™), were used. After 28 and 90 days, we performed macroscopic evaluation and analyzed the fixation strength, shrinkage, adhesion scores, and histopathology in all samples.

RESULTS

Measurements at both time points revealed that LifeMesh had fully conformed to the abdominal wall, and that its fixation strength was superior to that of the tack-fixated Symbotex and comparable to that of the tack-fixated PP. Shrinkage in all groups was similar. Adhesion scores with LifeMesh were lower than with PP and comparable with Symbotex at both time points. Histology demonstrated similar tissue responses in LifeMesh and Symbotex. Lack of necrosis, mineralization, or exuberant inflammatory reaction in all three groups pointed to their good progressive integration of the mesh to the abdominal wall. By 28 days the bio-adhesive layer in LifeMesh was substantially degraded, allowing a gradual tissue ingrowth that became the main fixation mode of this mesh to the abdominal wall.

CONCLUSIONS

The excellent incorporation of LifeMesh to the abdominal wall and its superior fixation strength, together with its low adhesion score, suggest that LifeMesh may become a preferred alternative for abdominal wall repair.

Biodegradability and Safety Study of LifeMesh™, a Novel Self-adhesive Mesh, in Sprague-Dawley Rats

Self-adhesive meshes are being developed to avoid complications due to traumatic fixation methods. LifeMesh™ is a novel self-adhesive mesh with a biodegradable gelatin adhesive layer developed for hernia repair. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and biodegradability of LifeMesh in Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats for 6 weeks, in comparison to a bare polypropylene (BPP) mesh fixed with sutures. LifeMesh was tolerated well and its implantation did not result in any adverse local reaction, and its adhesive layer was substantially degraded after 4 weeks. Histopathological examination revealed that the presence of the adhesive contributed to a uniform thickness of the granulation tissue surrounding the mesh, in contrast to a nonuniform granulation tissue with BPP. Nonuniform granulation tissue suggests that there will be poorer integration of the mesh to the abdominal wall. The use of LifeMesh also resulted in less adhesions of internal organs with a smaller surface area of involvement. These findings lend support to the potential benefit of LifeMesh for hernia repair in humans and expand the available information on the typical histopathological findings expected with biodegradable implants in the peritoneal cavity of SD rats.