Comparative study of four different types of intraperitoneal mesh prostheses in rats

Does intraperitoneal mesh increase the risk of bowel obstruction? A nationwide French analysis

INTRODUCTION

Incisional hernias are associated with a reduced quality of life. Mesh reinforcement of the abdominal wall is the current standard for incisional hernia repair (IHR), since it reduces the risk of recurrence. The best position for the mesh remains controversial, and each position has advantages and disadvantages.

OBJECTIVE

In this nationwide population-based study, we aimed to determine whether IHR with intraperitoneal mesh is associated with an increased risk of bowel obstruction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Using the French hospital database (PMSI), which collects data from all public and private hospitals, two patient cohorts were created and compared. Patients having undergone a laparoscopic IHR with intraperitoneal mesh (IPOM) in 2013 or 2014 due to a laparotomy performed in the 4 previous years were the IPOM group. Patients hospitalized for any other acute disease (i.e., without IHR) in 2013 and 2014, but having a similar laparotomy in the 4 previous years were the control group. Both cohorts were followed until 2019 in search of any episode of bowel obstruction.

RESULTS

A total of 815 patients were included in the IPOM group and matched to 1630 control patients. The 5 year bowel obstruction rate was 7.36% in the IPOM group and 4.42% in the control group (p < 0.01). In the multivariate analysis, after adjustment on age and obesity, incisional hernia repair with laparoscopic IPOM increased the risk of bowel obstruction in the 5 years following surgery (HR = 1.712; 95% CI 1.208-2.427; p = 0.0025).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients having undergone laparoscopic IPOM have an increased risk of bowel obstruction compared with patients who have a similar surgical history but no IHR.

Analysis of tissue inflammatory response, fibroplasia, and foreign body reaction between the polyglactin suture of abdominal aponeurosis in rats and the intraperitoneal implant of polypropylene, polypropylene/polyglecaprone and polyester/porcine collagen meshes

Purpose

To compare tissue inflammatory response, foreign body reaction, fibroplasia, and proportion of type I/III collagen between closure of abdominal wall aponeurosis using polyglactin suture and intraperitoneal implant of polypropylene, polypropylene/polyglecaprone, and polyester/porcine collagen meshes to repair defects in the abdominal wall of rats.

Methods

Forty Wistar rats were placed in four groups, ten animals each, for the intraperitoneal implant of polypropylene, polypropylene/polyglecaprone, and polyester/porcine collagen meshes or suture with polyglactin (sham) after creation of defect in the abdominal wall. Twenty-one days later, histological analysis was performed after staining with hematoxylin-eosin and picrosirius red.

Results

The groups with meshes had a higher inflammation score (p < 0.05) and higher number of gigantocytes (p < 0.05) than the sham group, which had a better fibroplasia with a higher proportion of type I/III collagen than the tissue separating meshes (p < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the three groups with meshes.

Conclusions

The intraperitoneal implant of polypropylene/polyglecaprone and polyester/porcine collagen meshes determined a more intense tissue inflammatory response with exuberant foreign body reaction, immature fibroplasia and low tissue proportion of type I/III collagen compared to suture with polyglactin of abdominal aponeurosis. However, there were no significant differences in relation to the polypropylene mesh group.

[Existing and forward-looking ways to prevent adhesions in IPOM hernia repair. A research overview]

IPOM intraperitoneal hernia repair, in comparison with other abdominal wall reconstruction methods, has a number of significant advantages. Among them are a reduction in operative time, low rate of surgical site infections, quick rehabilitation, and good cosmetic results. At the same time, one of the main constraining factors for its widespread use is the rather high frequency of adhesion formation between the implant and the abdominal organs. The first way to solve this serious problem is to improve the structure of the implant itself, and in the first place, its anti-adhesive layer. The second is the search for adjuvant tools that work in «problematic» areas, prone to adhesions formation, such as the points of implant fixation, its edges, or the areas of damage to antiadhesive layer due to a violation of the operative technique. It is desirable that they could exert their effect also in other parts of the abdominal cavity, which, despite the absence of a zone of «active» intervention, can also undergo adhesions. Based on this, the purpose of this review was to summarize modern data on the anti-adhesive activity of both composite implants and specialized membranes and liquid agents.