Zinc-Impregnated Mesh for Abdominal Wall Repair Reduces Infection in a Rat Model of Peritonitis.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to assess whether a zinc-impregnated polypropylene mesh (ZnMesh) has better antibacterial properties in a contaminated environment compared with a regular polypropylene mesh. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-eight Wistar Han rats underwent cecal ligation and puncture to induce peritonitis 24 h before implantation of an intraperitoneal ZnMesh or a regular polypropylene mesh. Primary outcome was the number of colony forming units (CFU) per sample (mesh and abdominal wall). Secondary outcomes were macroscopic (incorporation of mesh, abscesses, and adhesions on mesh surface) and histological (inflammatory cell reaction, mesh-specific parameters, and collagen deposition) parameters. All outcomes were evaluated after 30 and 90 d. RESULTS: After 30 d, no significant difference in CFU per sample was present between the ZnMesh and control groups. After 90 d, a lower number of CFU per sample was present in the ZnMesh group compared with the control group (trypticase soy agar with 5% sheep blood: 0 log10 CFU/sample IQR: 0-1.40 versus 1.58 log10 CFU/sample IQR: 0-4.30, P = 0.012; MacConkey: 0 log10 CFU/sample IQR: 0-2.65 versus 1.18 log10 CFU/sample IQR: 0-4.04, P = 0.438). After 90 d, the percentage of adhesions on mesh surface was significantly higher in the ZnMesh group (95% IQR: 60%-100% versus 50% IQR: 23%-75%, P = 0.029). No differences were seen in other macroscopic outcomes or histology. CONCLUSIONS: A significantly lower number of CFU per sample was found in the ZnMesh group after 90 d. After 30 d, no statistically significant differences in CFU per sample were seen. This result suggests that the ZnMesh group has better antibacterial properties in a contaminated environment. However, this is at the cost of a significantly higher percentage of adhesions.

Non-cross-linked biological mesh in complex abdominal wall hernia: a cohort study.

PURPOSE: Complex abdominal wall hernia repair (CAWHR) is a challenging procedure. Mesh prosthesis is indicated, but the use of synthetic mesh in a contaminated area may add to overall morbidity. Biological meshes may provide a solution, but little is known about long-term results. The aim of our study was to evaluate clinical efficacy and patient satisfaction following Strattice™ (PADM) placement. METHODS: In this cohort study, all patients operated for CAWHR with PADM in three large community hospitals in Germany were included. Patients underwent abdominal examination, an ultrasound was performed, and patients completed quality-of-life questionnaires. The study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov under Identifier NCT02168231. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients were assessed (14 male, age 67.5 years, follow-up 42.4 months). The most frequent postoperative complication was wound infection (39.1%). In no case, the PADM had to be removed. Four patients had passed away. During outpatient clinic visit, six out of 23 patients (26.1%) had a recurrence of hernia, one patient had undergone reoperation. Five patients (21.7%) had bulging of the abdominal wall. Quality-of-life questionnaires revealed that patients judged their scar with a median 3.5 out of 10 points (0 = best) and judged their restrictions during daily activities with a median of 0 out of 10.0 (0 = no restriction). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a high rate of wound infection, no biological mesh had to be removed. In some cases, therefore, the biological meshes provided a safe way out of desperate clinical situations. Both the recurrence rate and the amount of bulging are high (failure rate 47.8%). The reported quality of life is good after repair of these complex hernias.

Mesh versus suture repair of umbilical hernia in adults: a randomised, double-blind, controlled, multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: Both mesh and suture repair are used for the treatment of umbilical hernias, but for smaller umbilical hernias (diameter 1-4 cm) there is little evidence whether mesh repair would be beneficial. In this study we aimed to investigate whether use of a mesh was better in reducing recurrence compared with suture repair for smaller umbilical hernias. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, controlled multicentre trial in 12 hospitals (nine in the Netherlands, two in Germany, and one in Italy). Eligible participants were adults aged at least 18 years with a primary umbilical hernia of diameter 1-4 cm, and were randomly assigned (1:1) intraoperatively to either suture repair or mesh repair. In the first 3 years of the inclusion period, blocked randomisation (of non-specified size) was achieved by an envelope randomisation system; after this time computer-generated randomisation was introduced. Patients, investigators, and analysts were masked to the allocated treatment, and participants were stratified by hernia size (1-2 cm and >2-4 cm). At study initiation, all surgeons were invited to training sessions to ensure they used the same standardised techniques for suture repair or mesh repair. Patients underwent physical examinations at 2 weeks, and 3, 12, and 24-30 months after the operation. The primary outcome was the rate of recurrences of the umbilical hernia after 24 months assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population by physical examination and, in case of any doubt, abdominal ultrasound. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00789230. FINDINGS: Between June 21, 2006, and April 16, 2014, we randomly assigned 300 patients, 150 to mesh repair and 150 to suture repair. The median follow-up was 25·1 months (IQR 15·5-33·4). After a maximum follow-up of 30 months, there were fewer recurrences in the mesh group than in the suture group (six [4%] in 146 patients vs 17 [12%] in 138 patients; 2-year actuarial estimates of recurrence 3·6% [95% CI 1·4-9·4] vs 11·4% (6·8-18·9); p=0·01, hazard ratio 0·31, 95% CI 0·12-0·80, corresponding to a number needed to treat of 12·8). The most common postoperative complications were seroma (one [<1%] in the suture group vs five [3%] in the mesh group), haematoma (two [1%] vs three [2%]), and wound infection (one [<1%] vs three [2%]). There were no anaesthetic complications or postoperative deaths. INTERPRETATION: This is the first study showing high level evidence for mesh repair in patients with small hernias of diameter 1-4 cm. Hence we suggest mesh repair should be used for operations on all patients with an umbilical hernia of this size. FUNDING: Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.

Non-Cross-Linked Collagen Mesh Performs Best in a Physiologic, Noncontaminated Rat Model.

BACKGROUND: In laparoscopic incisional hernia repair, direct contact between the prosthesis and abdominal viscera is inevitable and may lead to adhesions. Despite the large variety of mesh prosthesis, little is known about their in vivo behavior. Biological meshes are considered to have many advantages, but due to their price they are rarely used. A rat model was used to assess biological and conventional synthetic meshes on their in vivo characteristics. DESIGN: One-hundred twenty male Wistar rats were randomized into five groups of 24 rats. A mesh was implanted intraperitoneally and fixated with nonresorbable sutures. The following five meshes were implanted: Parietene (polypropylene), Permacol (cross-linked porcine acellular dermal matrix), Strattice (non-cross-linked porcine acellular dermal matrix), XCM Biologic (non-cross-linked porcine acellular dermal matrix), and Omyra Mesh (condensed polytetrafluoroethylene). The rats were sacrificed after 30, 90, or 180 days. Incorporation, shrinkage, adhesions, abscess formation, and histology were assessed for all meshes. RESULTS: All animals thrived postoperatively. After 180 days, Permacol, Parietene, and Omyra Mesh had a significantly better incorporation than Strattice ( P = .001, P = .019, and P = .037 respectively). After 180 days, Strattice had significantly fewer adhesions on the surface of the mesh than Parietene ( P < .001), Omyra Mesh ( P = .011), and Permacol ( P = .027). After 30 days, Permacol had significantly stronger adhesions than Strattice ( P = .030). However, this difference was not significant anymore after 180 days. After 180 days, there was significantly less shrinkage in Permacol than in Strattice ( P = .001) and Omyra Mesh ( P = .050). CONCLUSION: Based on incorporation, adhesions, mesh shrinkage, and histologic parameters, Strattice performed best in this experimental rat model.

A novel foil flip-over system as the final layer in wound closure: excellent cosmetic results and patient comfort.

BACKGROUND: Wound closure after excision is commonly done with sutures or staples. A new sutureless innovative wound closure system is available for sutureless skin closure. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate wound healing, patient comfort, and cosmetic results of a foil flip-over system for excision of small skin lesion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients presenting to the department of Dermatology of Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands for skin surgery during a 1.5-year period were prospectively studied. Key outcome measures were wound healing, patient comfort, and cosmetic results. Three independent physicians scored photographs of the scars. Evaluation tools used were comfort and body image questionnaires and visual analogue scales. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients with 103 lesions were included in our study. The surgeon scored wound healing as excellent or good in 96%. No wound infections occurred. Ninety-two percent of patients scored removal of the system as comfortable. Median patient grade of scar after 1 month was 8 out of 10 points (interquartile range [IQR] 7-9). Median independent physician grade of photographs of the scars was 7.7 (IQR 7.1-8.0). CONCLUSION: Sutureless foil flip-over is promising, with excellent patient comfort characteristics and good to excellent cosmetic results.

Repair of complex abdominal wall hernias with a cross-linked porcine acellular matrix: cross-sectional results of a Dutch cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The use of synthetic mesh in potentially contaminated and contaminated incisional hernias may lead to a higher morbidity and mortality. Biological meshes may provide a solution, but since these meshes are rarely used, little is known about long-term results. The aim of this cohort study was to evaluate the long-term clinical efficacy and patient satisfaction following Permacol™ in complex abdominal wall hernia repair (CAWHR) patients in a cross-sectional fashion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients were operated for CAWHR with Permacol™ in the Netherlands between 2009 and 2012. The design was a multicenter cross-sectional cohort study. The STROCSS statement was followed. Patients were interviewed, underwent abdominal examination, and completed quality-of-life questionnaires. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02166112. Research Registry Identifier researchregistry4713. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients were seen in the outpatient clinic. Their hernias were classified as potentially contaminated in 25 patients (32.5%) and infected in 52 patients (67.5%). The mean follow-up was 22.2 ±â€¯12.6 months. The most frequent postoperative complication was wound infection (n = 21; 27.3%), meshes had to be removed in five patients (6.5%). By the time of their visit to the outpatient clinic, 22 patients (28.6%) had a recurrence of whom ten (13%) had undergone reoperation. Thirty-nine patients (50.6%) had bulging of the abdominal wall. Quality-of-life questionnaires revealed that patients graded their health status with a mean 6.8 (± 1.8) out of 10 points. CONCLUSION: Bulging and recurrence are frequently observed in patients treated with Permacol™ for CAWHR. Considering both recurrence and bulging as undesirable outcomes of treatment, a total of 46 patients (59.7%) had an unfavorable outcome. Infection rates were high, but comparable with similar patient cohorts. Quality-of-life questionnaires revealed that patients were satisfied with their general health, but scored significantly lower on most quality-of-life modalities of the Short Form-36 questionnaire.

Comparison of self-gripping mesh and sutured mesh in open inguinal hernia repair: A meta-analysis of long-term results.

BACKGROUND: Complications after inguinal hernioplasty pose a significant burden on individual patients and society because of high numbers of repair procedures. Recently, the long-term results of a self-gripping ProGrip mesh for open inguinal hernia repair have become available. The aim of this meta-analyses was to compare these long-term results with the results of a Lichtenstein hernioplasty with a sutured mesh focusing on chronic pain, recurrence rate, foreign body sensation, and operation duration. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was undertaken to identify randomized controlled trials comparing open inguinal hernia repair with a self-gripping ProGrip mesh and a conventional Lichtenstein hernioplasty. RESULTS: In the present meta-analysis, the outcomes of 10 randomized controlled trials enrolling 2,541 patients were pooled. The mean follow-up was 24 months (range 6-72 months). There was no significant difference in the incidence of chronic pain (odds ratio = 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.74-1.18), recurrence (odds ratio = 1.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-2.19), or foreign body sensation (odds ratio = 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.65-1.03), between the self-gripping mesh and sutured mesh group at all follow-up time points. The mean operating time was significantly shorter (odds ratio = -7.58; 95% confidence interval, -9.58 to -5.58) in the self-gripping mesh group. CONCLUSION: The self-gripping mesh has comparable results with a sutured mesh regarding the incidence of chronic postoperative inguinal pain, recurrence and foreign body sensation. However, long-term results still are based on relatively small patient numbers and outcomes measures are heterogenic. The main advantage of the self-gripping mesh is the consistently significantly reduced operation time.