Folding, Shrinkage and Infection Relation at Polypropylene Mesh Placed on the Rat Abdominal Wall
Abstract
Background: Although mesh implementation provides better results in terms of recurrence during abdominal wall hernia repair, mesh infection is an important issue that can cause prolonged hospitalization, recurrence, and increased costs. Sometimes is not possible to treat the infection without mesh extraction. Among the various commercially available meshes, polypropylene-based non-absorbable mesh most commonly used. Mesh composition, surface properties, and textile are the mesh-related factors that contribute to infection. Bacterial properties can also contribute to infection. Additionally, inappropriate surgical technique during mesh application can be another factor facilitating infection. The aim of this study is to investigate the relationship between folding, shrinkage, and infection in polypropylene mesh that is implemented on the rat abdominal wall.
Materials and Methods: Forty rats were divided into four groups of ten rats. Non-infected and infected 20 × 20-mm meshes were applied in groups 1 and 3, respectively, and after folding the non-infected and infected 40 × 20-mm meshes, were placed onto the abdominal wall in groups 2 and 4, respectively. After 16 days, all rats were sacrificed and bacterial colonization levels and mesh shrinkage rates were measured.
Results: Statistically significant mesh shrinkage was detected in both the infected groups. A strong causal relationship between surface area and bacterial colonization was detected.
Conclusion: Folding the mesh during hernia repair increased bacterial colonization. Infection leads to mesh shrinkage, which is a reason for recurrence. Unfolded mesh resulted in less bacterial colonization in this study.
References
Collaboration EHT. Mesh compared with non-mesh methods of open groin hernia repair: systematic review of randomized controlled trials. British Journal of Surgery. 2000;87(7):854-9.
den Hartog D, Dur AH, Tuinebreijer WE, Kreis RW. Open surgical procedures for incisional hernias. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008(3):CD006438.
Aydinuraz K, Agalar C, Agalar F, Ceken S, Duruyurek N, Vural T. In vitro S. epidermidis and S. aureus adherence to composite and lightweight polypropylene grafts. J Surg Res. 2009;157(1):e79-86.
Sanders D, Lambie J, Bond P, Moate R, Steer JA. An in vitro study assessing the effect of mesh morphology and suture fixation on bacterial adherence. Hernia. 2013;17(6):779-89.
East B, Plencner M, Kralovic M, Rampichova M, Sovkova V, Vocetkova K, et al. A polypropylene mesh modified with poly-epsilon-caprolactone nanofibers in hernia repair: large animal experiment. Int J Nanomedicine. 2018;13:3129-43.
Shankaran V, Weber DJ, Reed RL, 2nd, Luchette FA. A review of available prosthetics for ventral hernia repair. Ann Surg. 2011;253(1):16-26.
Engelsman AF, van der Mei HC, Ploeg RJ, Busscher HJ. The phenomenon of infection with abdominal wall reconstruction. Biomaterials. 2007;28(14):2314-27.
Çakmak A, Çirpanli Y, Bilensoy E, Yorganci K, Çaliş S, Saribaş Z, et al. Antibacterial activity of triclosan chitosan coated graft on hernia graft infection model. Int J Pharmaceut. 2009;381(2):214-9.
Grafmiller KT, Zuckerman ST, Petro C, Liu L, von Recum HA, Rosen MJ, et al. Antibiotic-releasing microspheres prevent mesh infection in vivo. The Journal of surgical research. 2016;206(1):41-7.
Usher FC, Fries JG, Ochsner JL, Tuttle LD, Jr. Marlex mesh, a new plastic mesh for replacing tissue defects: Ii. clinical studies. AMA Archives of Surgery. 1959;78(1):138-45.
Bachman S, Ramshaw B. Prosthetic Material in Ventral Hernia Repair: How Do I Choose? Surgical Clinics of North America. 2008;88(1):101-12.
Amid PK. . Hernia. 1997;1:15-21.
Sharma R, Fadaee N, Zarrinkhoo E, Towfigh S. Why we remove mesh. Hernia. 2018;22(6):953-9.
Falagas ME, Kasiakou SK. Mesh-related infections after hernia repair surgery. Clinical Microbiology and Infection. 2005;11(1):3-8.
Klinge U, Junge K, Spellerberg B, Piroth C, Klosterhalfen B, Schumpelick V. Do multifilament alloplastic meshes increase the infection rate? Analysis of the polymeric surface, the bacteria adherence, and the in vivo consequences in a rat model. J Biomed Mater Res. 2002;63(6):765-71.
Merritt K, Hitchins VM, Neale AR. Tissue colonization from implantable biomaterials with low numbers of bacteria. J Biomed Mater Res. 1999;44(3):261-5.
Bellon JM, Garcia-Carranza A, Garcia-Honduvilla N, Carrera-San Martin A, Bujan J. Tissue integration and biomechanical behaviour of contaminated experimental polypropylene and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene implants. Br J Surg. 2004;91(4):489-94.
Judge TW, Parker DM, Dinsmore RC. Abdominal wall hernia repair: a comparison of sepramesh and parietex composite mesh in a rabbit hernia model. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;204(2):276-81.
Mamy L, Letouzey V, Lavigne JP, Garric X, Gondry J, Mares P, et al. Correlation between shrinkage and infection of implanted synthetic meshes using an animal model of mesh infection. Int Urogynecol J. 2011;22(1):47-52.
Klinge U, Klosterhalfen B, Muller M, Ottinger AP, Schumpelick V. Shrinking of polypropylene mesh in vivo: an experimental study in dogs. Eur J Surg. 1998;164(12):965-9.
Zogbi L, Trindade EN, Trindade MR. Comparative study of shrinkage, inflammatory response and fibroplasia in heavyweight and lightweight meshes. Hernia. 2013;17(6):765-72.
