ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2014
Evaluation of three purely polypropylene meshes of different pore sizes in an onlay position in a New Zealand white rabbit model.
Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Contemporary management of the open abdomen: standards, challenges, and future directions.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Pooled it
- No difference in outcomes between large- and small-pore meshes in a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial investigating open retromuscular meshplasty for incisional hernia repair.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Trial
- Biomechanical evaluation of prophylactic reinforcement of the linea alba with a novel method of positioning and fixation of polypropylene mesh, in an animal model.Acta cirurgica brasileira · 2025Article
- Is mesh pore size in polypropylene meshes associated with the outcome in Lichtenstein inguinal hernia repair: a registry-based analysis of 22,141 patients.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024Article
- Evaluation of a Novel Absorbable Mesh in a Porcine Model of Abdominal Wall Repair.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2021Article
- The 4 Principles of Complex Abdominal Wall Reconstruction.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2019Review
- In vivo response to polypropylene following implantation in animal models: a review of biocompatibility.International urogynecology journal · 2017Review
- Mesh implants: An overview of crucial mesh parameters.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2015Article
- Safety considerations for synthetic sling surgery.Nature reviews. Urology · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of the study was to evaluate the influence of the pore size of a polypropylene mesh on the shrinkage and elasticity of the mesh-tissue complex and the inflammatory reaction to the implant in an open onlay hernia repair. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwenty-one 10 × 10 cm samples of polypropylene meshes of a different pore size (3.0 × 2.8 mm-PP3, 1.0 × 0.8 mm-PP1 and 0.6 × 0.5 mm-PP.5) were implanted in an onlay position in 21 New Zealand white rabbits. After 90 days of implantation the shrinkage, elasticity and foreign body reaction (FBR) were assessed.
resultsThe shrinkage of PP3 was 30.6 ± 4.3 %, PP1 49.3 ± 2.9 % and PP.5 49.5 ± 2.6 %. The shrinkage of PP3 was significantly lower (PP3 × PP1 p = 0.007, PP3 × PP.5 p = 0.005), PP1 and PP.5 were similar. The elasticity was similar. The strength of FBR in mesh pores was similar. The width of foreign body granuloma layers at the mesh-tissue interface was significantly reduced with increasing pore size (inner: PP3 10.1 ± 1.2; PP1 12.5 ± 2.9; PP.5 17.4 ± 5.2 and outer: PP3 21.2 ± 2.5; PP1 30.6 ± 6.3; PP.5 60.4 ± 14.9). All differences between the widths of granuloma layers were statistically significant (p < 0.010). One animal (PP1) was excluded because of a mesh infection.
conclusionsImplantation of polypropylene mesh of a pore size of 3 mm in an onlay position is associated with a significant reduction of shrinkage in comparison to a 1 mm pore lightweight and 0.5 mm pore heavyweight mesh. A pore size increase to 3 mm is not sufficient for an improvement of mesh-tissue complex elasticity in comparison to a 1 mm pore lightweight and 0.5 mm heavyweight mesh. Polypropylene mesh with enlarged pores to 3 mm is associated with a similar strength of FBR in mesh pores and a reduced foreign body granuloma in comparison to a 1 mm pore lightweight and 0.5 mm pore heavyweight mesh.
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.