Ponce Leon F, Manso J E F, Abud V L, Nogueira W, Silva P C, Martinez R
Interdisciplinar Surgical Science Post-Graduate Course, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
Departamento de Pós Graduação em Ciências Cirúrgicas da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Carlos Chagas Filho avenue, Centro de Ciências da Saúde-UFRJ, block K, 2nd floor, Ilha do Fundão, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 21941590, Brazil.
Hernia. 2018 Dec;22(6):1089-1100. doi: 10.1007/s10029-018-1808-y. Epub 2018 Aug 27.
To compare adhesion scores, repair strength and histological findings among sublay, onlay and primary repair incisional hernioplasty techniques. Surgical repairs were employed directly on healthy animals, without previous hernia induction, to avoid confounding factors related to hernia development.
Forty Wistar rats were divided into four groups, control, simulation, onlay and sublay. After 42 days, adhesion intensity, tensile strength of the abdominal wall and anatomopathological histological substrate were compared.
SL group presented greater adhesion scores (p < 0.0001), higher tensiometric (p < 0.0001), and was characterized by more histiocytes, mononuclear cells, macrovacuolar granulomas and type I collagen on histological analysis. Pearson correlation between adhesions and tensiometry, and between tensiometry and neocollagenization showed a strong positive association (r = 0.8905 and 0.6757, respectively in SL group, p < 0.05).
Mesh positioning in sublay compartment was followed by increased adhesion development and provides a stronger mesh-tissue attachment, in addition, resulted in a different histological profile of the inflammation/repair substrate. The intensity of these findings was directly correlated, suggesting they could be the result of a common biological phenomenon. Our findings indicate that mesh placement following the retromuscular technique generates a superior repair response, and give clues to a better understanding of the superiority of sublay repair in achieving lower recurrence rates. Characterization of the cellular and molecular elements responsible for the superiority of this technique is in our view an essential prerequisite aiming for improvements in the therapeutic options for the treatment of this disease.
比较衬层修补、覆盖修补和一期缝合修补腹壁切口疝修补技术的粘连评分、修复强度和组织学结果。手术修补直接应用于健康动物,未预先诱发疝,以避免与疝形成相关的混杂因素。
将40只Wistar大鼠分为四组,即对照组、模拟组、覆盖修补组和衬层修补组。42天后,比较粘连强度、腹壁抗张强度和解剖病理学组织学基质。
衬层修补组粘连评分更高(p < 0.0001),抗张强度更高(p < 0.0001),组织学分析显示有更多组织细胞、单核细胞、大空泡性肉芽肿和I型胶原。粘连与张力测定之间以及张力测定与新胶原形成之间的Pearson相关性显示出强正相关(衬层修补组分别为r = 0.8905和0.6757,p < 0.05)。
衬层间隙放置补片后粘连发展增加,补片与组织的附着更强,此外,炎症/修复基质的组织学特征也不同。这些结果的强度直接相关,表明它们可能是一种共同生物学现象的结果。我们的研究结果表明,采用肌后技术放置补片可产生更好的修复反应,并为更好地理解衬层修补在降低复发率方面的优势提供线索。我们认为,确定导致该技术优势的细胞和分子成分是改善该疾病治疗选择的必要前提。