Comparative study of four different types of intraperitoneal mesh prostheses in rats

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Fuziy,Rogério Aoki
Data de Publicação: 2019
Outros Autores: Artigiani Neto,Ricardo, Caetano Junior,Elesiario Marques, Alves,Ana Karina Soares, Lopes Filho,Gaspar Jesus, Linhares,Marcelo Moura
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-86502019000700202
Resumo: Abstract Purpose: To compare four types of mesh regarding visceral adhesions, inflammatory response and incorporation. Methods: Sixty Wistar rats were divided into four groups, with different meshes implanted intraperitoneally: polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE group); polypropylene with polydioxanone and oxidized cellulose (PCD); polypropylene (PM) and polypropylene with silicone (PMS). The variables analyzed were: area covered by adhesions, incorporation of the mesh and inflammatory reaction (evaluated histologically and by COX2 immunochemistry). Results: The PMS group had the lowest adhesion area (63.1%) and grade 1 adhesions. The ePTFE and PM groups presented almost the total area of their surface covered by adherences (99.8% and 97.7% respectively) The group ePTFE had the highest percentage of area without incorporation (42%; p <0.001) with no difference between the other meshes. The PMS group had the best incorporation rate. And the histological analysis revealed that the inflammation scores were significantly different. Conclusions: The PM mesh had higher density of adherences, larger area of adherences, adherences to organs and percentage of incorporation. ePTFE had the higher area of adherences and lower incorporation. The PMS mesh performed best in the inflammation score, had a higher incorporation and lower area of adherences, and it was considered the best type of mesh.
id SBDPC-1_2327a0ccc8b9157af427415847a65620
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0102-86502019000700202
network_acronym_str SBDPC-1
network_name_str Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Comparative study of four different types of intraperitoneal mesh prostheses in ratsTissue AdhesionsSurgical MeshCyclooxygenase 2RatsAbstract Purpose: To compare four types of mesh regarding visceral adhesions, inflammatory response and incorporation. Methods: Sixty Wistar rats were divided into four groups, with different meshes implanted intraperitoneally: polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE group); polypropylene with polydioxanone and oxidized cellulose (PCD); polypropylene (PM) and polypropylene with silicone (PMS). The variables analyzed were: area covered by adhesions, incorporation of the mesh and inflammatory reaction (evaluated histologically and by COX2 immunochemistry). Results: The PMS group had the lowest adhesion area (63.1%) and grade 1 adhesions. The ePTFE and PM groups presented almost the total area of their surface covered by adherences (99.8% and 97.7% respectively) The group ePTFE had the highest percentage of area without incorporation (42%; p <0.001) with no difference between the other meshes. The PMS group had the best incorporation rate. And the histological analysis revealed that the inflammation scores were significantly different. Conclusions: The PM mesh had higher density of adherences, larger area of adherences, adherences to organs and percentage of incorporation. ePTFE had the higher area of adherences and lower incorporation. The PMS mesh performed best in the inflammation score, had a higher incorporation and lower area of adherences, and it was considered the best type of mesh.Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia2019-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-86502019000700202Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira v.34 n.7 2019reponame:Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira (Online)instname:Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia (SBDPC)instacron:SBDPC10.1590/s0102-865020190070000003info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessFuziy,Rogério AokiArtigiani Neto,RicardoCaetano Junior,Elesiario MarquesAlves,Ana Karina SoaresLopes Filho,Gaspar JesusLinhares,Marcelo Mouraeng2019-09-09T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0102-86502019000700202Revistahttps://www.bvs-vet.org.br/vetindex/periodicos/acta-cirurgica-brasileira/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||sgolden@terra.com.br0102-86501678-2674opendoar:2019-09-09T00:00Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia (SBDPC)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparative study of four different types of intraperitoneal mesh prostheses in rats
title Comparative study of four different types of intraperitoneal mesh prostheses in rats
spellingShingle Comparative study of four different types of intraperitoneal mesh prostheses in rats
Fuziy,Rogério Aoki
Tissue Adhesions
Surgical Mesh
Cyclooxygenase 2
Rats
title_short Comparative study of four different types of intraperitoneal mesh prostheses in rats
title_full Comparative study of four different types of intraperitoneal mesh prostheses in rats
title_fullStr Comparative study of four different types of intraperitoneal mesh prostheses in rats
title_full_unstemmed Comparative study of four different types of intraperitoneal mesh prostheses in rats
title_sort Comparative study of four different types of intraperitoneal mesh prostheses in rats
author Fuziy,Rogério Aoki
author_facet Fuziy,Rogério Aoki
Artigiani Neto,Ricardo
Caetano Junior,Elesiario Marques
Alves,Ana Karina Soares
Lopes Filho,Gaspar Jesus
Linhares,Marcelo Moura
author_role author
author2 Artigiani Neto,Ricardo
Caetano Junior,Elesiario Marques
Alves,Ana Karina Soares
Lopes Filho,Gaspar Jesus
Linhares,Marcelo Moura
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Fuziy,Rogério Aoki
Artigiani Neto,Ricardo
Caetano Junior,Elesiario Marques
Alves,Ana Karina Soares
Lopes Filho,Gaspar Jesus
Linhares,Marcelo Moura
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Tissue Adhesions
Surgical Mesh
Cyclooxygenase 2
Rats
topic Tissue Adhesions
Surgical Mesh
Cyclooxygenase 2
Rats
description Abstract Purpose: To compare four types of mesh regarding visceral adhesions, inflammatory response and incorporation. Methods: Sixty Wistar rats were divided into four groups, with different meshes implanted intraperitoneally: polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE group); polypropylene with polydioxanone and oxidized cellulose (PCD); polypropylene (PM) and polypropylene with silicone (PMS). The variables analyzed were: area covered by adhesions, incorporation of the mesh and inflammatory reaction (evaluated histologically and by COX2 immunochemistry). Results: The PMS group had the lowest adhesion area (63.1%) and grade 1 adhesions. The ePTFE and PM groups presented almost the total area of their surface covered by adherences (99.8% and 97.7% respectively) The group ePTFE had the highest percentage of area without incorporation (42%; p <0.001) with no difference between the other meshes. The PMS group had the best incorporation rate. And the histological analysis revealed that the inflammation scores were significantly different. Conclusions: The PM mesh had higher density of adherences, larger area of adherences, adherences to organs and percentage of incorporation. ePTFE had the higher area of adherences and lower incorporation. The PMS mesh performed best in the inflammation score, had a higher incorporation and lower area of adherences, and it was considered the best type of mesh.
publishDate 2019
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2019-01-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-86502019000700202
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-86502019000700202
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/s0102-865020190070000003
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira v.34 n.7 2019
reponame:Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira (Online)
instname:Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia (SBDPC)
instacron:SBDPC
instname_str Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia (SBDPC)
instacron_str SBDPC
institution SBDPC
reponame_str Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira (Online)
collection Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia (SBDPC)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||sgolden@terra.com.br
_version_ 1752126445401931776