Cargando…

BETWEEN PROLENE(®), ULTRAPRO(®) AND BARD SOFT(®) MESHES WHICH PRESENTS THE BEST PERFORMANCE IN THE REPAIR OF THE ABDOMINAL WALL?

BACKGROUND: In the definition of the mesh to be used to correct hernias, porosity, amount of absorbable material and polypropylene should be considered in the different stages of healing process. AIM: To evaluate the inflammatory reaction in the use of macro and microporous meshes of high and low we...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: UTRABO, Carlos Alberto Lima, CZECZKO, Nicolau Gregori, BUSATO, Cesar Roberto, MONTEMÓR-NETTO, Mário Rodrigues, LIPINSKI, Leandro, MALAFAIA, Osvaldo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgia Digestiva 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8195468/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34133524
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0102-672020210001e1577
_version_ 1783706508300648448
author UTRABO, Carlos Alberto Lima
CZECZKO, Nicolau Gregori
BUSATO, Cesar Roberto
MONTEMÓR-NETTO, Mário Rodrigues
LIPINSKI, Leandro
MALAFAIA, Osvaldo
author_facet UTRABO, Carlos Alberto Lima
CZECZKO, Nicolau Gregori
BUSATO, Cesar Roberto
MONTEMÓR-NETTO, Mário Rodrigues
LIPINSKI, Leandro
MALAFAIA, Osvaldo
author_sort UTRABO, Carlos Alberto Lima
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In the definition of the mesh to be used to correct hernias, porosity, amount of absorbable material and polypropylene should be considered in the different stages of healing process. AIM: To evaluate the inflammatory reaction in the use of macro and microporous meshes of high and low weight in the repair of defects in the abdominal wall of rats. METHODS: Ninety Wistar rats (Rattus norvegicus albinus) were used. The animals were submitted to similar surgical procedures, with lesion of the ventral abdominal wall, maintaining the integrity of the parietal peritoneum and correction using the studied meshes (Prolene(®), Ultrapro(®) and Bard Soft(®)). Euthanasia was performed at 30, 60 and 120 days after surgery. The abdominal wall segments were submitted to histological analysis using H&E, Masson’s trichrome, immunohistochemistry, picrosirius red and tensiometric evaluation. RESULTS: On the 120(th) day, the tensiometric analysis was superior with Ultrapro(®) macroporous mesh. The inflammatory process score showed a significant prevalence of subacute process at the beginning and at the end of the study. Microporous meshes showed block encapsulation and in macroporous predominance of filamentous encapsulation. CONCLUSION: The Ultrapro(®) mesh showed better performance than the others in healing process of the abdominal wall.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8195468
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgia Digestiva
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81954682021-06-24 BETWEEN PROLENE(®), ULTRAPRO(®) AND BARD SOFT(®) MESHES WHICH PRESENTS THE BEST PERFORMANCE IN THE REPAIR OF THE ABDOMINAL WALL? UTRABO, Carlos Alberto Lima CZECZKO, Nicolau Gregori BUSATO, Cesar Roberto MONTEMÓR-NETTO, Mário Rodrigues LIPINSKI, Leandro MALAFAIA, Osvaldo Arq Bras Cir Dig Original Article BACKGROUND: In the definition of the mesh to be used to correct hernias, porosity, amount of absorbable material and polypropylene should be considered in the different stages of healing process. AIM: To evaluate the inflammatory reaction in the use of macro and microporous meshes of high and low weight in the repair of defects in the abdominal wall of rats. METHODS: Ninety Wistar rats (Rattus norvegicus albinus) were used. The animals were submitted to similar surgical procedures, with lesion of the ventral abdominal wall, maintaining the integrity of the parietal peritoneum and correction using the studied meshes (Prolene(®), Ultrapro(®) and Bard Soft(®)). Euthanasia was performed at 30, 60 and 120 days after surgery. The abdominal wall segments were submitted to histological analysis using H&E, Masson’s trichrome, immunohistochemistry, picrosirius red and tensiometric evaluation. RESULTS: On the 120(th) day, the tensiometric analysis was superior with Ultrapro(®) macroporous mesh. The inflammatory process score showed a significant prevalence of subacute process at the beginning and at the end of the study. Microporous meshes showed block encapsulation and in macroporous predominance of filamentous encapsulation. CONCLUSION: The Ultrapro(®) mesh showed better performance than the others in healing process of the abdominal wall. Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgia Digestiva 2021-06-11 /pmc/articles/PMC8195468/ /pubmed/34133524 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0102-672020210001e1577 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License
spellingShingle Original Article
UTRABO, Carlos Alberto Lima
CZECZKO, Nicolau Gregori
BUSATO, Cesar Roberto
MONTEMÓR-NETTO, Mário Rodrigues
LIPINSKI, Leandro
MALAFAIA, Osvaldo
BETWEEN PROLENE(®), ULTRAPRO(®) AND BARD SOFT(®) MESHES WHICH PRESENTS THE BEST PERFORMANCE IN THE REPAIR OF THE ABDOMINAL WALL?
title BETWEEN PROLENE(®), ULTRAPRO(®) AND BARD SOFT(®) MESHES WHICH PRESENTS THE BEST PERFORMANCE IN THE REPAIR OF THE ABDOMINAL WALL?
title_full BETWEEN PROLENE(®), ULTRAPRO(®) AND BARD SOFT(®) MESHES WHICH PRESENTS THE BEST PERFORMANCE IN THE REPAIR OF THE ABDOMINAL WALL?
title_fullStr BETWEEN PROLENE(®), ULTRAPRO(®) AND BARD SOFT(®) MESHES WHICH PRESENTS THE BEST PERFORMANCE IN THE REPAIR OF THE ABDOMINAL WALL?
title_full_unstemmed BETWEEN PROLENE(®), ULTRAPRO(®) AND BARD SOFT(®) MESHES WHICH PRESENTS THE BEST PERFORMANCE IN THE REPAIR OF THE ABDOMINAL WALL?
title_short BETWEEN PROLENE(®), ULTRAPRO(®) AND BARD SOFT(®) MESHES WHICH PRESENTS THE BEST PERFORMANCE IN THE REPAIR OF THE ABDOMINAL WALL?
title_sort between prolene(®), ultrapro(®) and bard soft(®) meshes which presents the best performance in the repair of the abdominal wall?
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8195468/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34133524
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0102-672020210001e1577
work_keys_str_mv AT utrabocarlosalbertolima betweenproleneultraproandbardsoftmesheswhichpresentsthebestperformanceintherepairoftheabdominalwall
AT czeczkonicolaugregori betweenproleneultraproandbardsoftmesheswhichpresentsthebestperformanceintherepairoftheabdominalwall
AT busatocesarroberto betweenproleneultraproandbardsoftmesheswhichpresentsthebestperformanceintherepairoftheabdominalwall
AT montemornettomariorodrigues betweenproleneultraproandbardsoftmesheswhichpresentsthebestperformanceintherepairoftheabdominalwall
AT lipinskileandro betweenproleneultraproandbardsoftmesheswhichpresentsthebestperformanceintherepairoftheabdominalwall
AT malafaiaosvaldo betweenproleneultraproandbardsoftmesheswhichpresentsthebestperformanceintherepairoftheabdominalwall