Harrell Andrew G, Novitsky Yuri W, Cristiano Joseph A, Gersin Keith S, Norton H James, Kercher Kent W, Heniford B Todd
Division of Gastrointestinal and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Department of General Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, 1000 Blythe Boulevard, MEB #601, Charlotte, NC 28203, USA.
Surg Endosc. 2007 Jul;21(7):1170-4. doi: 10.1007/s00464-006-9147-y. Epub 2007 Feb 7.
Placement of an intraperitoneal prosthetic is required for laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. The biocompatibility of these prosthetics determines the host's inflammatory response, scar plate formation, tissue ingrowth, and subsequent mesh performance, including prosthetic compliance and prevention of hernia recurrence. We evaluated the host response to intraperitoneal placement of several prosthetics currently used in clinical practice.
A 4-cm x 4-cm piece of mesh was implanted on intact peritoneum in New Zealand white rabbits. The mesh types included expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) (DualMesh), ePTFE and polypropylene (Composix, heavyweight polypropylene), polypropylene and oxidized regenerated cellulose (Proceed, midweight polypropylene), and polypropylene (Marlex, heavyweight polypropylene). At four months, standard hematoxylin and eosin and Milligan's trichrome stains of the mesh-tissue interaction were analyzed by three observers blinded to the mesh types. Each specimen was evaluated for scar plate formation, inflammatory response, and tissue ingrowth. Each of these three categories was graded on a standard scale of 1-4 (1 = normal tissue and 4 = severe inflammatory response). The scores were analyzed using Wilcoxon rank sum test with p < 0.05 as significant.
Ten samples of each mesh type were evaluated. There was no difference in tissue incorporation between the groups. The mean scar plate formation was greater in the heavyweight polypropylene meshes than for DualMesh (p = 0.04). With Proceed, the reduction in scar plate formation compared with that for Composix and Marlex approached statistical significance (p = 0.07). The mean number of inflammatory cells was greater around the ePTFE when compared with the midweight polypropylene (p = 0.02) but equal to the other meshes.
The four prosthetic materials evaluated in this study demonstrate comparable host biocompatibility as evidenced by the tissue ingrowth. Scar plate formation around DualMesh was significantly less than that around Composix and Marlex. Interestingly, more inflammatory cells were noted surrounding the DualMesh which was equal to that of the heavyweight meshes. Proceed, a midweight polypropylene mesh, has the potential for improved patient tolerance compared to heavyweight polypropylene meshes based on its favorable histologic findings.
腹腔镜腹疝修补术需要放置腹腔内补片。这些补片的生物相容性决定了宿主的炎症反应、瘢痕板形成、组织长入以及随后的补片性能,包括补片顺应性和预防疝复发。我们评估了宿主对目前临床实践中使用的几种补片腹腔内放置的反应。
将一块4厘米×4厘米的补片植入新西兰白兔的完整腹膜上。补片类型包括膨化聚四氟乙烯(ePTFE)(双网补片)、ePTFE和聚丙烯(复合补片,重磅聚丙烯)、聚丙烯和氧化再生纤维素(前进补片,中重磅聚丙烯)以及聚丙烯(马利克斯补片,重磅聚丙烯)。四个月时,由三名对补片类型不知情的观察者对补片与组织相互作用的标准苏木精-伊红染色和米利根三色染色进行分析。对每个标本进行瘢痕板形成、炎症反应和组织长入的评估。这三个类别中的每一个都按照1-4的标准量表进行评分(1=正常组织,4=严重炎症反应)。使用威尔科克森秩和检验分析评分,p<0.05为有统计学意义。
对每种补片类型的10个样本进行了评估。各组之间在组织整合方面没有差异。重磅聚丙烯补片的平均瘢痕板形成比双网补片更大(p=0.04)。对于前进补片,与复合补片和马利克斯补片相比,瘢痕板形成的减少接近统计学意义(p=0.07)。与中重磅聚丙烯相比,ePTFE周围的炎症细胞平均数更多(p=0.02),但与其他补片相同。
本研究中评估的四种补片材料显示出可比的宿主生物相容性,这在组织长入中得到了证明。双网补片周围的瘢痕板形成明显少于复合补片和马利克斯补片周围的瘢痕板形成。有趣的是,双网补片周围观察到更多的炎症细胞,这与重磅补片的炎症细胞数量相同。基于其良好的组织学结果,中重磅聚丙烯补片前进补片与重磅聚丙烯补片相比,有可能提高患者的耐受性。