The Biomechanical Response of Lightweight vs Heavyweight Mesh in Ventral Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review of Animal Studies.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Christopher Bach Sørensen, Jacob Rosenberg, Jason Joe Baker
{"title":"The Biomechanical Response of Lightweight vs Heavyweight Mesh in Ventral Hernia Repair: A Systematic Review of Animal Studies.","authors":"Christopher Bach Sørensen, Jacob Rosenberg, Jason Joe Baker","doi":"10.1177/15533506251374831","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundThere is currently insufficient evidence to determine whether lightweight or heavyweight mesh is the better choice for ventral hernias. Recurrence and postoperative pain are associated with biomechanical responses such as inflammation, foreign body reaction, cell ingrowth, and tensile strength, which can be examined in animal studies. This study aimed to compare the biomechanical differences between light- and heavyweight meshes in animal models.MethodsA systematic search was conducted on August 14, 2023, in PubMed and Embase for studies comparing light- and heavyweight meshes implanted on animal abdominal walls. We included studies reporting on non-coated polypropylene or polyester meshes in an onlay placement. Studies were excluded if the mesh was coated, absorbable, fixated with fibrin glue, implanted in a contaminated field, or if it was an in vitro study. The study was reported according to PRISMA 2020 guideline, and risk of bias was assessed using the SYRCLE bias assessment tool.ResultsOur search yielded 4050 records, which resulted in 91 reports for full-text screening, and 20 studies were included in the final analyses. Heavyweight meshes caused more inflammation and foreign body reaction compared with lightweight meshes but displayed similar tensile strength post-implantation. There was insufficient evidence regarding cell ingrowth.ConclusionHeavyweight meshes caused increased inflammation and foreign body reaction compared with lightweight meshes. Although heavyweight meshes preimplantation have increased tensile strength compared with lightweight meshes, no difference was found post-implantation. This suggests that lightweight meshes may be a good option for ventral hernia repair.</p>","PeriodicalId":22095,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Innovation","volume":" ","pages":"15533506251374831"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Innovation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15533506251374831","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BackgroundThere is currently insufficient evidence to determine whether lightweight or heavyweight mesh is the better choice for ventral hernias. Recurrence and postoperative pain are associated with biomechanical responses such as inflammation, foreign body reaction, cell ingrowth, and tensile strength, which can be examined in animal studies. This study aimed to compare the biomechanical differences between light- and heavyweight meshes in animal models.MethodsA systematic search was conducted on August 14, 2023, in PubMed and Embase for studies comparing light- and heavyweight meshes implanted on animal abdominal walls. We included studies reporting on non-coated polypropylene or polyester meshes in an onlay placement. Studies were excluded if the mesh was coated, absorbable, fixated with fibrin glue, implanted in a contaminated field, or if it was an in vitro study. The study was reported according to PRISMA 2020 guideline, and risk of bias was assessed using the SYRCLE bias assessment tool.ResultsOur search yielded 4050 records, which resulted in 91 reports for full-text screening, and 20 studies were included in the final analyses. Heavyweight meshes caused more inflammation and foreign body reaction compared with lightweight meshes but displayed similar tensile strength post-implantation. There was insufficient evidence regarding cell ingrowth.ConclusionHeavyweight meshes caused increased inflammation and foreign body reaction compared with lightweight meshes. Although heavyweight meshes preimplantation have increased tensile strength compared with lightweight meshes, no difference was found post-implantation. This suggests that lightweight meshes may be a good option for ventral hernia repair.

腹疝修补中轻、重补片的生物力学响应:动物研究的系统回顾。
背景:目前还没有足够的证据来确定轻量级还是重量级补片是治疗腹疝的更好选择。复发和术后疼痛与生物力学反应有关,如炎症、异物反应、细胞向内生长和抗拉强度,这些可以在动物实验中进行检测。本研究旨在比较动物模型中轻型和重型网片的生物力学差异。方法系统检索于2023年8月14日在PubMed和Embase进行的关于动物腹壁植入轻型和重型网片的比较研究。我们纳入了关于非涂层聚丙烯网或聚酯网的研究报告。如果网状物被涂覆、可吸收、用纤维蛋白胶固定、植入污染区域,或者是体外研究,则排除研究。该研究按照PRISMA 2020指南进行报道,并使用sycle偏倚评估工具评估偏倚风险。结果我们检索到4050条记录,其中91篇报告被全文筛选,20篇研究被纳入最终分析。与轻型网片相比,重型网片引起的炎症和异物反应更多,但植入后的拉伸强度相似。关于细胞向内生长的证据不足。结论与轻型网片相比,重型网片引起的炎症和异物反应增加。虽然植入前的重量级网片与轻量级网片相比,抗拉强度有所增加,但植入后没有发现差异。这表明轻质补片可能是腹疝修复的一个很好的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Surgical Innovation
Surgical Innovation 医学-外科
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
72
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Surgical Innovation (SRI) is a peer-reviewed bi-monthly journal focusing on minimally invasive surgical techniques, new instruments such as laparoscopes and endoscopes, and new technologies. SRI prepares surgeons to think and work in "the operating room of the future" through learning new techniques, understanding and adapting to new technologies, maintaining surgical competencies, and applying surgical outcomes data to their practices. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信