A review of biocompatibility in hernia repair; considerations in vitro and in vivo for selecting the most appropriate repair material

Nano tantalum-coated 3D printed porous polylactic acid/beta-tricalcium phosphate scaffolds with enhanced biological properties for guided bone regeneration

Bone defects caused by tumors section, traffic accidents, and surgery remain a challenge in clinical. The drawbacks of traditional autografts and allografts limit their clinical application. 3D printed porous scaffolds have monumental potential to repair bone defects but still cannot effectively promote bone formation. Nano tantalum (Ta) has been reported with effective osteogenesis capability. Herein, we fabricated 3D printed PLA/β-TCP scaffold by using the fused deposition modeling (FDM) technique. Ta was doped on the surface of scaffolds utilizing the surface adhesion ability of polydopamine to improve its properties. The constructed PLA/β-TCP/PDA/Ta had good physical properties. In vitro studies demonstrated that the PLA/β-TCP/PDA/Ta scaffolds considerably promote cell proliferation and migration, and it additionally has osteogenic properties. Therefore, Ta doped 3D printed PLA/β-TCP/PDA/Ta scaffold could incontestably improve surface bioactivity and lead to better osteogenesis, which may provide a unique strategy to develop bioactive bespoke implants in orthopedic applications.

Complications Reported to the Food and Drug Administration: A Cross-sectional Comparison of Urogynecologic Meshes

IMPORTANCE

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration uses the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database to evaluate the safety of urogynecologic meshes; however, reports on individual meshes have not been characterized.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to compare complications among available urogynecologic meshes reported to the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database.

STUDY DESIGN

This study is a cross-sectional analysis of medical device reports (MDRs) of urogynecologic mesh from January 2004 to March 2019, using the Reed Tech Navigator (LexisNexis), which codes MDRs. The percentage of reports containing specific complaints (not an adverse event rate) were compared with χ 2 tests with Dunn-Sidak correction. Correlations with time on market, mesh weight, stiffness, and porosity were determined.

RESULTS

The 34,485 reports examined included 6 transvaginal meshes, 4 sacrocolpopexy meshes, and 10 midurethral slings. Most reported events were pain, erosion, and infection. For transvaginal prolapse, less than 10% of Uphold Lite (Boston Scientific) reports contained pain or erosion versus greater than 90% of Prolift/Prolift+M (Ethicon, P < 0.001). For sacrocolpopexy mesh, greater than 90% of Gynemesh (Ethicon; Prolift in vaginal form) reports included erosion and pain versus less than 60% for Artisyn (Ethicon), Restorelle (Colpoplast), and Upsylon (Boston Scientific, P < 0.0001). For slings, Gynecare TVT Obturator had the highest proportion of erosion and pain complaints. Heavier sling meshes had more reports. When Ascend (Caldera Medical), an outlier with only 5 reports, was excluded, transvaginal mesh stiffness correlated strongly with number of reports. For transvaginal meshes, number of reports correlated with time on market (ρ = 0.8, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Individual meshes have different properties with different complication profiles, which should inform mesh development and use. Gynemesh MDRs included pain and erosion more frequently than others. Comprehensive registries are needed.

A novel biosynthetic scaffold mesh reinforcement affords the lowest hernia recurrence in the highest-risk patients

INTRODUCTION

Patients with higher postoperative infection risk undergoing ventral hernia repair (VHR) have limited options for mesh use. Biosynthetic mesh is intended to utilize the durability of synthetic mesh combined with the biocompatibility of biologic mesh. We sought to assess the outcomes of a novel biosynthetic scaffold mesh for VHR in higher risk patients over a 12-month postoperative period.

METHODS

Two cohorts of 50 consecutive patients who underwent VHR with TELA Bio OviTex biosynthetic or synthetic mesh were retrospectively compared. Endpoints included surgical site occurrence (SSO), readmission rate, and hernia recurrence following VHR at 12 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

OviTex mesh placement was associated with higher risk Ventral Hernia Working Group (VHWG) distribution and more contaminated CDC wound class distribution compared to synthetic mesh placement (VHWG grade 3: 68% vs. 6%, p < 0.001; CDC class > I: 70% vs. 6%, p < 0.001). Additionally, concomitant procedures were performed more often with OviTex mesh placement than synthetic mesh placement (70% vs 10%, p < 0.001). The OviTex mesh performed comparably to synthetic mesh in terms of incidences of SSO (36% vs 22%, p = 0.19), readmission rates (24% vs 14%, p = 0.31), and hernia recurrence (6% vs 12%, p = 0.74). On further evaluation, patients who developed SSO with OviTex mesh (n = 18) had a 17% hernia recurrence whereas those with synthetic mesh (n = 11) had an associated 55% hernia recurrence (p = 0.048).

CONCLUSIONS

The OviTex biosynthetic mesh was used in higher risk patients and performed similarly to synthetic mesh in regards to rate of SSO, readmissions, and hernia recurrence. Furthermore, patients who developed SSO with Ovitex mesh were significantly less likely to have hernia recurrence than those with synthetic mesh. Overall, the data suggest that biosynthetic mesh is a more desirable option for definitive hernia repair in higher risk patients.