Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33400026›Full record

ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2022

Safety and efficacy of absorbable and non-absorbable fixation systems for intraperitoneal mesh fixation: an experimental study in swine.

S Kapoulas, A Papalois, G Papadakis, G Tsoulfas, E Christoforidis, B Papaziogas, D Schizas, G Chatzimavroudis

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

S Kapoulas2nd Department of Surgery, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, G. Gennimatas General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece. s_kapoulas@yahoo.gr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7794-470X
A PapaloisELPEN Pharmaceuticals Research and Experimental Centre, Pikermi, Greece.
G PapadakisDepartment of Renal Transplant and Access Surgery, Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
G Tsoulfas1st Department of Surgery, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Papageorgiou General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece.
E Christoforidis2nd Department of Surgery, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, G. Gennimatas General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece.
B Papaziogas2nd Department of Surgery, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, G. Gennimatas General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece.
D Schizas1st Department of Surgery, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Laikon General Hospital, Athens, Greece.
G Chatzimavroudis2nd Department of Surgery, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, G. Gennimatas General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki · GRElpen Pharmaceutical (Greece) · GRGuy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust · GBNational and Kapodistrian University of Athens · GRUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeChoice of the best possible fixation system in terms of safety and effectiveness for intraperitoneal mesh placement in hernia surgery remains controversial. The aim of the present study was to compare the performance of four fixation systems in a swine model of intraperitoneal mesh fixation.

methodsFourteen Landrace swine were utilized in the study. The experiment included two stages. Initially, four pieces of mesh (Ventralight ™ ST) sizing 10 × 5 cm were placed and fixed intraperitoneally to reinforce 4 small full thickness abdominal wall defects created with diathermy. These defects were repaired primarily with absorbable suture before mesh implantation. Each mesh was anchored with a different tack device between Absorbatack™, Protack™, Capsure™, or Optifix™. The second stage took place after 60 days and included euthanasia, laparoscopy, and laparotomy via U-shaped incision to obtain the measurements for the outcome parameters. The primary endpoint of the study was to compare the peel strength of the compound tack/mesh from the abdominal wall. Secondary parameters were the extent and quality of visceral adhesions to the mesh, the degree of mesh shrinkage and the histological response around the tacks.

resultsThirteen out of 14 animals survived the experiment and 10 were included in the final analysis. Capsure™ tacks had higher peel strength when compared to Absorbatack™ (p = 0.028); Protack™ (p = 0.043); and Optifix™ (p = 0.009). No significant differences were noted regarding the extent of visceral adhesions (Friedman's test p value 0.854), the adhesion quality (Friedman's test p value 0.506), or the mesh shrinkage (Friedman's test p value = 0.827). Four out of the ten animals developed no adhesions at all 2 months after implantation.

conclusionCapsure™ fixation system provided higher peel strength that the other tested devices in our swine model of intraperitoneal mesh fixation. Our findings generate the hypothesis that this type of fixation may be superior in a clinical setting. Clinical trials with long-term follow-up are required to assess the safety and efficacy of mesh fixation systems in hernia surgery.

Indexed as

Hernia, VentralLaparoscopyAnimalsHerniorrhaphyHumansSurgical MeshSuturesSwineTissue AdhesionsExperimental studyFixation devicesLaparoscopic hernia repairMeshTack

Identifiers

PMID33400026
OpenAlexW3120537922

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.