Cargando…
Repair of Abdominal Wall Defects with Biodegradable Laminar Prostheses: Polymeric or Biological?
INTRODUCTION: Biological and synthetic laminar absorbable prostheses are available for the repair of hernia defects in the abdominal wall. They share the important feature of being gradually degraded in the host, resulting in place the formation of a neotissue. This study was designed to assess the...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3528658/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23285119 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0052628 |
_version_ | 1782253846858301440 |
---|---|
author | Pascual, Gemma Sotomayor, Sandra Rodríguez, Marta Pérez-Köhler, Bárbara Bellón, Juan M. |
author_facet | Pascual, Gemma Sotomayor, Sandra Rodríguez, Marta Pérez-Köhler, Bárbara Bellón, Juan M. |
author_sort | Pascual, Gemma |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Biological and synthetic laminar absorbable prostheses are available for the repair of hernia defects in the abdominal wall. They share the important feature of being gradually degraded in the host, resulting in place the formation of a neotissue. This study was designed to assess the host tissue’s incorporation of collagen bioprostheses and a synthetic absorbable prosthesis. METHODS: Partial defects were created in the abdominal walls of 72 New Zealand rabbits and repaired using collagen bioprostheses Tutomesh® and Strattice® or a synthetic prosthesis Bio-A®. Specimens were collected for light microscopy, collagens gene and protein expression, macrophage response and biomechanical resistance at 14, 30, 90 and 180 days post-implantation. RESULTS: Tutomesh® and Bio-A® were gradually infiltrated by the host tissue and almost completely degraded by 180 days post-implantation. In contrast, Strattice® exhibited material encapsulation, no prosthetic degradation and low cell infiltration at earlier timepoints, whereas at later study time, collagen deposition could be observed within the mesh. In the short term, Bio-A® exhibited higher level of collagen 1 and 3 mRNA expression compared with the two other biological prostheses, which exhibited two peaks of higher expression at 14 and 90 days. The expression of collagen III was homogeneous throughout the study and collagen I deposition was more evident in Strattice®. Macrophage response decreased over time in biomeshes. However, in the synthetic mesh remained high and homogeneous until 90 days. The biomechanical analysis demonstrated the progressively increasing tensile strength of all biomaterials. CONCLUSIONS: The tissue infiltration of laminar absorbable prostheses is affected by the structure and composition of the mesh. The synthetic prosthesis exhibited a distinct pattern of tissue incorporation and a greater macrophage response than did the biological prostheses. Of all of the laminar, absorbable biomaterials that were tested in this study, Strattice® demonstrated the optimal levels of integration and degradation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3528658 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2012 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-35286582013-01-02 Repair of Abdominal Wall Defects with Biodegradable Laminar Prostheses: Polymeric or Biological? Pascual, Gemma Sotomayor, Sandra Rodríguez, Marta Pérez-Köhler, Bárbara Bellón, Juan M. PLoS One Research Article INTRODUCTION: Biological and synthetic laminar absorbable prostheses are available for the repair of hernia defects in the abdominal wall. They share the important feature of being gradually degraded in the host, resulting in place the formation of a neotissue. This study was designed to assess the host tissue’s incorporation of collagen bioprostheses and a synthetic absorbable prosthesis. METHODS: Partial defects were created in the abdominal walls of 72 New Zealand rabbits and repaired using collagen bioprostheses Tutomesh® and Strattice® or a synthetic prosthesis Bio-A®. Specimens were collected for light microscopy, collagens gene and protein expression, macrophage response and biomechanical resistance at 14, 30, 90 and 180 days post-implantation. RESULTS: Tutomesh® and Bio-A® were gradually infiltrated by the host tissue and almost completely degraded by 180 days post-implantation. In contrast, Strattice® exhibited material encapsulation, no prosthetic degradation and low cell infiltration at earlier timepoints, whereas at later study time, collagen deposition could be observed within the mesh. In the short term, Bio-A® exhibited higher level of collagen 1 and 3 mRNA expression compared with the two other biological prostheses, which exhibited two peaks of higher expression at 14 and 90 days. The expression of collagen III was homogeneous throughout the study and collagen I deposition was more evident in Strattice®. Macrophage response decreased over time in biomeshes. However, in the synthetic mesh remained high and homogeneous until 90 days. The biomechanical analysis demonstrated the progressively increasing tensile strength of all biomaterials. CONCLUSIONS: The tissue infiltration of laminar absorbable prostheses is affected by the structure and composition of the mesh. The synthetic prosthesis exhibited a distinct pattern of tissue incorporation and a greater macrophage response than did the biological prostheses. Of all of the laminar, absorbable biomaterials that were tested in this study, Strattice® demonstrated the optimal levels of integration and degradation. Public Library of Science 2012-12-21 /pmc/articles/PMC3528658/ /pubmed/23285119 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0052628 Text en © 2012 Pascual et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Pascual, Gemma Sotomayor, Sandra Rodríguez, Marta Pérez-Köhler, Bárbara Bellón, Juan M. Repair of Abdominal Wall Defects with Biodegradable Laminar Prostheses: Polymeric or Biological? |
title | Repair of Abdominal Wall Defects with Biodegradable Laminar Prostheses: Polymeric or Biological? |
title_full | Repair of Abdominal Wall Defects with Biodegradable Laminar Prostheses: Polymeric or Biological? |
title_fullStr | Repair of Abdominal Wall Defects with Biodegradable Laminar Prostheses: Polymeric or Biological? |
title_full_unstemmed | Repair of Abdominal Wall Defects with Biodegradable Laminar Prostheses: Polymeric or Biological? |
title_short | Repair of Abdominal Wall Defects with Biodegradable Laminar Prostheses: Polymeric or Biological? |
title_sort | repair of abdominal wall defects with biodegradable laminar prostheses: polymeric or biological? |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3528658/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23285119 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0052628 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pascualgemma repairofabdominalwalldefectswithbiodegradablelaminarprosthesespolymericorbiological AT sotomayorsandra repairofabdominalwalldefectswithbiodegradablelaminarprosthesespolymericorbiological AT rodriguezmarta repairofabdominalwalldefectswithbiodegradablelaminarprosthesespolymericorbiological AT perezkohlerbarbara repairofabdominalwalldefectswithbiodegradablelaminarprosthesespolymericorbiological AT bellonjuanm repairofabdominalwalldefectswithbiodegradablelaminarprosthesespolymericorbiological |