Journals / Ulusal Cerrahi Dergisi / 2008 / Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 3

The comparison of adhesion formation effects of Hİ-TEX®PARP NT and Proceed Mesh

Hİ-TEX®PARP NT yama ile Proceed Yama'nın adezyon yapıcı özelliklerinin karşılaştırılması

Pages
131–136
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As a result, Proceed mesh is thought to be a more suitable hernia repairment material compared to HI-TEX mesh.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose: Aim of this experimental study is to compare the adhesion formation effects of two different prosthetic materials (HI-TEX ®Parp NT mesh and Proceed mesh) in hernia repair.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Defects of 2x1 cm size were created at the right and left of each rat's anterior abdominal wall.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result, Proceed mesh is thought to be a more suitable hernia repairment material compared to HI-TEX mesh.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Purpose: Aim of this experimental study is to compare the adhesion formation effects of two different prosthetic materials (HI-TEX ®Parp NT mesh and Proceed mesh) in hernia repair. Material and Methods: Twenty Wistar-Albino rats were used for the study. Defects of 2x1 cm size were created at the right and left of each rat's anterior abdominal wall. Proceed mesh is implanted on the right side and HI-TEX mesh on the left side at half of them (Group A), and Proceed mesh is implanted on the left side and HI-TEX mesh on the right side at the other half (Group B) to repair the defect. Two rats of each group is sacrificed at the 7th, 14th, 21st, 28th and 35th days postoperatively and extension and severity of the adhesion and tissue reaction to the implants are evaluated. Results: At the end of the study, no difference was found between two groups concerning extension and severity of the adhesion. Adhesion were more frequent in the rats sacrificed on the 7th and 14th days. Proceed mesh adhesion extension (U=376, p<0.05) and severity (U=352, p<0.05)) were significantly less than HI-TEX mesh. Tissue reactions to implants were more with HI-TEX mesh, however, no difference was found statistically significant (x2=0.41, p>0.05). Conclusion: We have the opinion that Proceed mesh is superior to HI-TEX mesh in hernia repair as it has less adhesion formation effect. As a result, Proceed mesh is thought to be a more suitable hernia repairment material compared to HI-TEX mesh.

Özet

Amaç: Bu deneysel çalışmanın amacı, iki farklı prostetik materyalin ( Hi-TEX®Parp NT yama ve Proceed yama) herni onarımında adezyon yapıcı özelliklerinin karşılaştırılmasıdır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışma 20 adet Wistar- Albino sıçan ile yapıldı. Her denekte karın ön duvarının sağında ve solunda 2x1 cm defekt oluşturuldu. Sıçanların yarısında Proceed yama sağ tarafa, HI-Tex yama sol tarafa (Grup A) ve diğer yarısında Proceed yama sol tarafa, HI-Tex yama sağ tarafa (Grup B) implante edilmek suretiyle defekt onarıldı. Postoperatif 7., 14., 21., 28. ve 35. günlerde her gruptan iki sıçan sakrifiye edilerek adezyon yaygınlığı ve şiddeti değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Çalışma sonunda; her iki grup arasında adezyon yaygınlığı ve şiddeti yönünden fark olmadığı, 7. ve 14. günlerde sakrifiye edilen sıçanlarda adezyonların yoğun olduğu, Proceed yama ile adezyon yaygınlığının (U=376, p 0.05) saptandı. Sonuç: Herni onarımında Proceed yama'nın HI-Tex yama'ya göre daha az adezyon yapıcı etkisinin olması nedeniyle daha uygun bir materyal olduğu görüşüne varıldı.

🔖

Cite This Article

YALÇIN, E., HASDEMİR, A. O., BÜYÜKAŞIK, O., DİNLER, K., ÇÖL, C. (2008). The comparison of adhesion formation effects of Hİ-TEX®PARP NT and Proceed Mesh. Ulusal Cerrahi Dergisi, Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 3, 131–136. https://ajindex.com/articles/325599

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Israelsson LA, Jonsson T. Incisional hernia after midline laparotomy: a prospective study. Eur J Surg 1996;162:125-129
  2. Mudge M, Hughes LE. Incisional hernia: A 10-year prospective study. Laparoscopic incisional hernioplasty of incidence and attitudes. Br J Surg 1985;72:70-71
  3. George CD, Ellis H. The results of incisional hernia repair: A twelve year review. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1986;68:185-187
  4. Read RC, Yoder G. Recent trends in the management of incisional herniation. Arch Surg 1989;124:485-488
  5. Manninen MJ, Lavonius M, Perhoniemi VJ. Results of incisional hernia repair: a retrospective study of 172 unselected hernioplasties. Eur J Surg 1991;157:29-31
  6. Langer C, Liersch T, Kley C, et al. Twenty-five years of experience in incisional hernia surgery: A comparative retrospective study of 432 incisional hernia repairs. Chirurg 2003;74:638-645
  7. Paul A, Korenkov M, Peters S, et al. Unacceptable results of the Mayo procedure for repair of abdominal incisional hernias. Eur J Surg 1998;164:361-367
  8. Anthony T, Bergen PC, Kim LT. Factors affecting recurrence following incisional herniorrhaphy. World J Surg 2000;24:95-101
  9. Van der Linden FTPM, Van Vroonhoven TJMV. Long-term results after surgical correction of incisional hernia. Neth J Surg 1988;40:127-129
  10. Celi D, Cucinotta A, Lucibello L, et al. Abdominal wall hernia surgery: prosthetic materials. Chir Ital. 2005;57:207-210
  11. Read RC. Milestones in the history of hernia surgery: prosthetic repair. Hernia. 2004;8:8-14
  12. Sodji M, Rogier R, Durand S, et al. Composite non absorbable parietal prosthesis in polyethylen terephtalate – polyurethane (HI-Tex ® PARP NT): prevention of intraperitoneal adhesions. Experimental study on rabbit. Ann. Chir 2001;126:549-553
  13. Hutchinson RW, Chagnon M, Divilio LT. Pre-clinical Abdominal Adhesion Studies with Surgical Mesh. Bussiness Briefing Global Surgery 2004 www.touchbriefings.com/pdf/952/Hutchinson. pdf
  14. Adhesion Scoring Group; Improvement of interobserver reproducibility of adhesion scoring systems. Fertility and Sterility 1994;62:984-988
  15. Hooker GD, Taylor BM, Driman DK. Prevention of adhesion formation with use of sodium hyaluronate- based bioresorbable membrane in a rat model of ventral hernia repair with polypropylene mesh—A randomized, controlled study. Surgery. 1999;125:211–216
  16. Cappelletti M, Attolini G, Cangioni G, et al. The use of mesh in abdominal wall defects. Minerva Chir 1997;52:1169-1176
  17. Cumberland VH. A p