ArticlePloS one2012
Repair of abdominal wall defects with biodegradable laminar prostheses: polymeric or biological?
Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biosynthetic meshes in contaminated fields: where are we now? A systematic review and meta-analysis in humans.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Outcomes of biosynthetic absorbable mesh use in high risk CDC Class I ventral hernia repair: a single surgeon series.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2022Article
- Polymer Hernia Repair Materials: Adapting to Patient Needs and Surgical Techniques.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Long term comparative evaluation of two types of absorbable meshes in partial abdominal wall defects: an experimental study in rabbits.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2020Article
- A case of acute mesentero-axial gastric volvulus in a patient with a diaphragmatic hernia: experience with a laparoscopic approach.Journal of surgical case reports · 2015Article
- A case of a colocutaneous fistula: A rare complication of mesh migration into the sigmoid colon after open tension-free hernia repair.International journal of surgery case reports · 2015Article
- Postimplantation host tissue response and biodegradation of biologic versus polymer meshes implanted in an intraperitoneal position.Surgical endoscopy · 2014Article
- Emergency open incarcerated hernia repair with a biological mesh in a patient with colorectal liver metastasis receiving chemotherapy and bevacizumab uncomplicated wound healing.Case reports in emergency medicine · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBiological and synthetic laminar absorbable prostheses are available for the repair of hernia defects in the abdominal wall. They share the important feature of being gradually degraded in the host, resulting in place the formation of a neotissue. This study was designed to assess the host tissue's incorporation of collagen bioprostheses and a synthetic absorbable prosthesis.
methodsPartial defects were created in the abdominal walls of 72 New Zealand rabbits and repaired using collagen bioprostheses Tutomesh® and Strattice® or a synthetic prosthesis Bio-A®. Specimens were collected for light microscopy, collagens gene and protein expression, macrophage response and biomechanical resistance at 14, 30, 90 and 180 days post-implantation.
resultsTutomesh® and Bio-A® were gradually infiltrated by the host tissue and almost completely degraded by 180 days post-implantation. In contrast, Strattice® exhibited material encapsulation, no prosthetic degradation and low cell infiltration at earlier timepoints, whereas at later study time, collagen deposition could be observed within the mesh. In the short term, Bio-A® exhibited higher level of collagen 1 and 3 mRNA expression compared with the two other biological prostheses, which exhibited two peaks of higher expression at 14 and 90 days. The expression of collagen III was homogeneous throughout the study and collagen I deposition was more evident in Strattice®. Macrophage response decreased over time in biomeshes. However, in the synthetic mesh remained high and homogeneous until 90 days. The biomechanical analysis demonstrated the progressively increasing tensile strength of all biomaterials.
conclusionsThe tissue infiltration of laminar absorbable prostheses is affected by the structure and composition of the mesh. The synthetic prosthesis exhibited a distinct pattern of tissue incorporation and a greater macrophage response than did the biological prostheses. Of all of the laminar, absorbable biomaterials that were tested in this study, Strattice® demonstrated the optimal levels of integration and degradation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.