Cargando…
A biomechanical analysis of different meshes for reconstructions of the pelvic floor in the porcine model
PURPOSE: Many different surgical approaches have been established for the repair of a pelvic organ prolapse. Especially in laparoscopic surgery, it is important to generate easy surgical techniques with similar stability. This study shall simplify the choice of mesh by evaluating three polypropylene...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8918124/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34845538 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00404-021-06344-9 |
_version_ | 1784668667782365184 |
---|---|
author | Trageser, Nadja Sauerwald, Axel Ludwig, Sebastian Malter, Wolfram Wegmann, Kilian Karapanos, Leonidas Radosa, Julia Jansen, Alina Katharina Eichler, Christian |
author_facet | Trageser, Nadja Sauerwald, Axel Ludwig, Sebastian Malter, Wolfram Wegmann, Kilian Karapanos, Leonidas Radosa, Julia Jansen, Alina Katharina Eichler, Christian |
author_sort | Trageser, Nadja |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Many different surgical approaches have been established for the repair of a pelvic organ prolapse. Especially in laparoscopic surgery, it is important to generate easy surgical techniques with similar stability. This study shall simplify the choice of mesh by evaluating three polypropylene meshes regarding their biomechanical properties. METHODS: Biomechanical testing was performed in the porcine model. The meshes are fixated on porcine fresh cadaver cervices after subtotal hysterectomy. The apical part of the mesh is fixated with parallel screw clamps at the testing frame. Forty-one trials were performed overall, subdivided into four subgroups. The groups differ in mesh type and fixation method. Maximum load, displacement at failure and stiffness parameters were evaluated with an Instron 5565(®) test frame. RESULTS: SERATEX(®) E11 PA (E11) showed the highest values for maximum load (199 ± 29N), failure displacement (71 ± 12 mm) and stiffness (3.93 ± 0.59 N/mm). There was no significant difference in all three evaluated parameters between SERATEX(®) B3 PA (B3) and SERATEX(®) SlimSling(®) with bilateral fixation (SSB). SERATEX(®) SlimSling(®) with unilateral fixation (SSU) had the lowest stiffness (0.91 ± 0.19 N/mm) and maximum load (30 ± 2 N) but no significant difference in displacement at failure. CONCLUSION: All meshes achieved a good tensile strength, but the results of maximum load show that the E11 is superior to the other meshes. Through a bilateral fixation of SERATEX(®) SlimSling(®), a simple operating method is generated without a loss of stability. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8918124 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89181242022-03-17 A biomechanical analysis of different meshes for reconstructions of the pelvic floor in the porcine model Trageser, Nadja Sauerwald, Axel Ludwig, Sebastian Malter, Wolfram Wegmann, Kilian Karapanos, Leonidas Radosa, Julia Jansen, Alina Katharina Eichler, Christian Arch Gynecol Obstet General Gynecology PURPOSE: Many different surgical approaches have been established for the repair of a pelvic organ prolapse. Especially in laparoscopic surgery, it is important to generate easy surgical techniques with similar stability. This study shall simplify the choice of mesh by evaluating three polypropylene meshes regarding their biomechanical properties. METHODS: Biomechanical testing was performed in the porcine model. The meshes are fixated on porcine fresh cadaver cervices after subtotal hysterectomy. The apical part of the mesh is fixated with parallel screw clamps at the testing frame. Forty-one trials were performed overall, subdivided into four subgroups. The groups differ in mesh type and fixation method. Maximum load, displacement at failure and stiffness parameters were evaluated with an Instron 5565(®) test frame. RESULTS: SERATEX(®) E11 PA (E11) showed the highest values for maximum load (199 ± 29N), failure displacement (71 ± 12 mm) and stiffness (3.93 ± 0.59 N/mm). There was no significant difference in all three evaluated parameters between SERATEX(®) B3 PA (B3) and SERATEX(®) SlimSling(®) with bilateral fixation (SSB). SERATEX(®) SlimSling(®) with unilateral fixation (SSU) had the lowest stiffness (0.91 ± 0.19 N/mm) and maximum load (30 ± 2 N) but no significant difference in displacement at failure. CONCLUSION: All meshes achieved a good tensile strength, but the results of maximum load show that the E11 is superior to the other meshes. Through a bilateral fixation of SERATEX(®) SlimSling(®), a simple operating method is generated without a loss of stability. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-11-29 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC8918124/ /pubmed/34845538 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00404-021-06344-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | General Gynecology Trageser, Nadja Sauerwald, Axel Ludwig, Sebastian Malter, Wolfram Wegmann, Kilian Karapanos, Leonidas Radosa, Julia Jansen, Alina Katharina Eichler, Christian A biomechanical analysis of different meshes for reconstructions of the pelvic floor in the porcine model |
title | A biomechanical analysis of different meshes for reconstructions of the pelvic floor in the porcine model |
title_full | A biomechanical analysis of different meshes for reconstructions of the pelvic floor in the porcine model |
title_fullStr | A biomechanical analysis of different meshes for reconstructions of the pelvic floor in the porcine model |
title_full_unstemmed | A biomechanical analysis of different meshes for reconstructions of the pelvic floor in the porcine model |
title_short | A biomechanical analysis of different meshes for reconstructions of the pelvic floor in the porcine model |
title_sort | biomechanical analysis of different meshes for reconstructions of the pelvic floor in the porcine model |
topic | General Gynecology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8918124/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34845538 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00404-021-06344-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tragesernadja abiomechanicalanalysisofdifferentmeshesforreconstructionsofthepelvicfloorintheporcinemodel AT sauerwaldaxel abiomechanicalanalysisofdifferentmeshesforreconstructionsofthepelvicfloorintheporcinemodel AT ludwigsebastian abiomechanicalanalysisofdifferentmeshesforreconstructionsofthepelvicfloorintheporcinemodel AT malterwolfram abiomechanicalanalysisofdifferentmeshesforreconstructionsofthepelvicfloorintheporcinemodel AT wegmannkilian abiomechanicalanalysisofdifferentmeshesforreconstructionsofthepelvicfloorintheporcinemodel AT karapanosleonidas abiomechanicalanalysisofdifferentmeshesforreconstructionsofthepelvicfloorintheporcinemodel AT radosajulia abiomechanicalanalysisofdifferentmeshesforreconstructionsofthepelvicfloorintheporcinemodel AT jansenalinakatharina abiomechanicalanalysisofdifferentmeshesforreconstructionsofthepelvicfloorintheporcinemodel AT eichlerchristian abiomechanicalanalysisofdifferentmeshesforreconstructionsofthepelvicfloorintheporcinemodel AT tragesernadja biomechanicalanalysisofdifferentmeshesforreconstructionsofthepelvicfloorintheporcinemodel AT sauerwaldaxel biomechanicalanalysisofdifferentmeshesforreconstructionsofthepelvicfloorintheporcinemodel AT ludwigsebastian biomechanicalanalysisofdifferentmeshesforreconstructionsofthepelvicfloorintheporcinemodel AT malterwolfram biomechanicalanalysisofdifferentmeshesforreconstructionsofthepelvicfloorintheporcinemodel AT wegmannkilian biomechanicalanalysisofdifferentmeshesforreconstructionsofthepelvicfloorintheporcinemodel AT karapanosleonidas biomechanicalanalysisofdifferentmeshesforreconstructionsofthepelvicfloorintheporcinemodel AT radosajulia biomechanicalanalysisofdifferentmeshesforreconstructionsofthepelvicfloorintheporcinemodel AT jansenalinakatharina biomechanicalanalysisofdifferentmeshesforreconstructionsofthepelvicfloorintheporcinemodel AT eichlerchristian biomechanicalanalysisofdifferentmeshesforreconstructionsofthepelvicfloorintheporcinemodel |