ArticleSurgical endoscopy2017
Short-term strength of non-penetrating mesh fixation: LifeMesh™, Tisseel™, and ProGrip™.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Introducing the Mesh Integration (MINT) Index: a standardised ratio scale for assessing in vivo hernia mesh performance.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Self-adhesive hydrogel meshes reduce tissue incorporation and mechanical behavior versus microgrips self-fixation: a preclinical study.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2022Article
- Mesh fixation using novel bio-adhesive coating compared to tack fixation for IPOM hernia repair: in vivo evaluation in a porcine model.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNon-penetrating mesh fixation is becoming widely accepted even though little is known about the short-term fixation strength of these techniques. Although clinical outcomes are the ultimate measure of effectiveness, ex vivo biomechanical evaluation provides insights about the load-carrying capacity of the mesh-tissue complex in vivo. As such, the purpose of this study was to compare the short-term fixation strength of three unique non-penetrating methods of fixation: LifeMesh™, ProGrip™, and Tisseel™. Among these, LifeMesh™ is a novel technology where large-pore, mid-weight polypropylene mesh is embedded in a dry matrix of porcine gelatin and microbial transglutaminase enzyme, providing self-fixation without the need for a separate adhesive application.
methodsSeven mongrel swine underwent implantation of two 4 × 7 cm pieces of either LifeMesh™, ProGrip™, or polypropylene mesh fixated with 2 mL of Tisseel™; 10 min after application, the samples were excised with the abdominal wall and stored for immediate biomechanical testing. The samples underwent lap shear testing to determine the short-term fixation strength of these three technologies.
resultsProGrip™ demonstrated mean fixation strength of 1.3 N/cm (±STE 0.2). Mean fixation for mesh fixated with Tisseel™ was 2.6 N/cm (±STE 0.5). LifeMesh™ samples had mean fixation strength of 8.0 N/cm (±STE 2.1). Analysis of variance testing showed that interfacial strength of LifeMesh™ was significantly greater than that of either ProGrip™ or Tisseel™. ProGrip™ and Tisseel™ were not significantly different from each other (p = 0.06).
conclusionsShort-term strength of mesh fixation is an undescribed factor in hernia repair, but could have significant implications for early recurrence and mesh contraction. While further investigation is needed to define adequate interfacial strength, this comparison of non-penetrating mesh fixation methods shows that the novel LifeMesh™ technology exhibits greater strength than other non-penetrating fixation techniques.
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.