Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26941568›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of medical sciences2016

Impairment of the Peritoneal Surface as a Decisive Factor for Intestinal Adhesions in Intraperitoneal Onlay Mesh Surgery - Introducing a New Rat Model.

M Winny, L Grethe, L Maegel, D Jonigk, T Lippmann, J Klempnauer, D Poehnert

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of medical sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Adhesion Prevention Efficacy of Composite Meshes ParietexInternational journal of medical sciences · 2016
    Article
  5. Treatment of de-peritonealized intestine with 4DryFieldAmerican journal of translational research · 2016
    Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

M Winny1. Clinic for General, Abdominal and Transplant Surgery, Hannover Medical School, Germany;
L Grethe1. Clinic for General, Abdominal and Transplant Surgery, Hannover Medical School, Germany;
L Maegel2. Institute of Pathology, Hannover Medical School, Germany.
D Jonigk2. Institute of Pathology, Hannover Medical School, Germany.
T Lippmann2. Institute of Pathology, Hannover Medical School, Germany.
J Klempnauer1. Clinic for General, Abdominal and Transplant Surgery, Hannover Medical School, Germany;
D Poehnert1. Clinic for General, Abdominal and Transplant Surgery, Hannover Medical School, Germany;
Medizinische Hochschule Hannover · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMeshes implanted intraperitoneally are known to cause adhesions potentially resulting in complications such as chronic pain, enterocutaneous fistula, or mesh infection. This study introduces a model for investigation of intestine-to-mesh adhesions and evaluates as to whether missing of visceral peritoneum is causative.

methodsIn 18 rats, rectangular 1.5 x 2 cm patches of an uncoated polypropylene mesh (Ultrapro(®)) were sewn to the inner abdominal wall next to the cecum. Additionally, a meso-suture ensured contact between cecum and mesh. Rats were assigned to 2 groups: in 8 rats the peritoneum was left intact, in 10 the cecum was depleted from peritoneum with abrasion. Sacrifice was on day 7. Macroscopic evaluation used two adhesion scores. Specimens were evaluated microscopically, statistical analyses employed student's t-test.

resultsOn day 7, rats with mesh implantation combined with locally de-peritonealization by cecal abrasion mostly showed severe cecum-to-mesh agglutination (mean Lauder score 92%, mean total Hoffmann score 90%), whereas meshes of most animals without cecal abrasion only had some coverage with intraabdominal fat (33%, 24%; p = 0.0002). Histological work-up showed adequate wall ingrowth of mesh in all rats. In animals with cecal abrasion, meshes were mostly adhesive with cecal wall. However, when the peritoneum of cecum was unimpaired, abdominal wall above the mesh as well as cecum usually revealed sub-peritoneal tissue and a mono-layer cell coverage as seen in normal peritoneum.

conclusionThis study introduces a model mimicking a clinical situation of e.g. hernia repair by intraperitoneally implanted meshes when mesh has contact with normal and with de-peritonealized intestine. The model might be useful for testing mesh types and coatings as well as other devices for their efficacy in adhesion prevention. The high adhesion scores of rats with local de-peritonealization compared with the low scores of animals with intact peritoneum indicate that the integrity of intestinal peritoneum is a decisive factor for adhesion formation.

Indexed as

Surgical MeshAbdominal WallAnimalsCecumDigestive System Surgical ProceduresIntestinal DiseasesPeritoneumPolypropylenesPostoperative ComplicationsRatsTissue AdhesionsPolypropylenesAdhesion formationCecal abrasion.Experimental studyHernia mesh repairintraperitoneal onlay mesh surgeryPolypropylene mesh

Identifiers

PMID26941568
PMCPMC4764776
OpenAlexW2327270382

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.