Characterizing the ex vivo mechanical properties of synthetic polypropylene surgical mesh

Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials

Volumn 37, Issue , 2014, Pages 48-55

  Li, Xinxin ^a   Kruger, Jennifer ^b   Jor, Jessica ^b   Nielsen, Poul ^a   Nash, Martyn ^a   Wong, Vivien ^c,d   Dietz, Hans Peter ^c,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^d NEPEAN HOSPITAL   (Australia)

Author keywords

Anisotropy; Hernia; Mechanical properties; Polypropylene mesh; Viscoelasticity

Indexed keywords

ANISOTROPY; CREEP; MECHANICAL PROPERTIES; REPAIR; SURGERY; VISCOELASTICITY;

ANISOTROPIC PROPERTY; BIOMECHANICAL BEHAVIOR; HERNIA; IRREVERSIBLE DEFORMATION; MESH PERFORMANCE; PERMANENT DEFORMATIONS; PHYSIOLOGICAL LOADS; VISCO-ELASTIC BEHAVIORS;

POLYPROPYLENES;

POLYPROPYLENE;

ABDOMINAL PRESSURE; ANISOTROPY; ARTICLE; BIOMECHANICS; COUGHING; EX VIVO STUDY; HERNIOPLASTY; HYSTERESIS; POLYPROPYLENE SURGICAL MESH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RIGIDITY; SURGICAL MESH; TENSILE STRENGTH; VISCOELASTICITY; ELASTICITY; MATERIALS TESTING; MECHANICS; VISCOSITY;

ANISOTROPY; ELASTICITY; MATERIALS TESTING; MECHANICAL PROCESSES; POLYPROPYLENES; SURGICAL MESH; VISCOSITY;

EID: 84901610624     PISSN: 17516161     EISSN: 18780180     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2014.05.005     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Administration UFaD 2011. Surgical mesh for treatment of women with pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence. US Food and Drug Administration;.
2. Afonso J, Martins P, Girao M, Jorge RN, Ferreira A, Mascarenhas T, Fernandes A, Bernardes J, Baracat E, de Lima GR. Mechanical properties of polypropylene mesh used in pelvic floor repair. Int. Urogynecol. J. 2008, 19(3):375-380.
3. Altman D, Väyrynen T, Engh ME, Axelsen S, Falconer C. Anterior colporrhaphy versus transvaginal mesh for pelvic-organ prolapse. N. Engl. J. Med. 2011, 364(19):1826-1836.
4. Amid P. Classification of biomaterials and their related complications in abdominal wall hernia surgery. Hernia 1997, 1(1):15-21.
5. Anurov M, Titkova S, Oettinger A. Effectiveness of experimental hernia repair depends on orientation of mesh implant with anisotropic structure. Hernia 2009, 13(Suppl 1). (1: S14-15).
6. Anurov M, Titkova S, Oettinger A. Biomechanical compatibility of surgical mesh and fascia being reinforced: dependence of experimental hernia defect repair results on anisotropic surgical mesh positioning. Hernia 2012, 16(2):199-210.
7. Baessler K, Maher CF. Mesh augmentation during pelvic-floor reconstructive surgery: risks and benefits. Curr. Opin. Obstet. Gynecol. 2006, 18(5):560-566.
8. Bellón JM. Role of the new lightweight prostheses in improving hernia repair. Cirugía Española (English Edition) 2009, 85(5):268-273.
9. Brown C, Finch J. Which mesh for hernia repair?. Ann. R. Coll. Surg. Engl. 2010, 92(4):272.
10. Cobb WS, Burns JM, Kercher KW, Matthews BD, James Norton H, Todd Heniford B. Normal intraabdominal pressure in healthy adults. J. Surg. Res. 2005, 129(2):231-235.
11. Dietz H, Vancaillie P, Svehla M, Walsh W, Steensma A, Vancaillie T. Mechanical properties of urogynecologic implant materials. Int. Urogynecol. J. 2003, 14(4):239-243.
12. Dietz HP, Shek C, De Leon J, Steensma A. Ballooning of the levator hiatus. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2008, 31(6):676-680.
13. Doctor H. Evaluation of various prosthetic materials and newer meshes for hernia repairs. J. Minim. Access Surg. 2006, 2(3):110.
14. Duhovic M, Bhattacharyya D. Simulating the deformation mechanisms of knitted fabric composites. Compos. Part A: Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2006, 37(11):1897-1915.
15. Feola, A.J., 2011. Impact of vaginal synthetic prolapse meshes on the mechanics of the host tissue response. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, Order No. 3501478, University of Pittsburgh, 301. Retrieved from: (928110563). http://ezproxy.auckland.ac.nz/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928110563?accountid=8424.
16. Guttormson R, Tschirhart J, Boysen D, Martinson K. Are post-operative activity restrictions evidence-based?. Am. J. Surg. 2008, 195(3):401-404.
17. Hernández-Gascón B, Pena E, Melero H, Pascual G, Doblaré M, Ginebra M, Bellón J, Calvo B. Mechanical behaviour of synthetic surgical meshes: finite element simulation of the herniated abdominal wall. Acta biomater. 2011, 7(11):3905-3913.
18. Jones KA, Feola A, Meyn L, Abramowitch SD, Moalli PA. Tensile properties of commonly used prolapse meshes. Int. Urogynecol. J. 2009, 20(7):847-853.
19. Junge K, Klinge U, Prescher A, Giboni P, Niewiera M, Schumpelick V. Elasticity of the anterior abdominal wall and impact for reparation of incisional hernias using mesh implants. Hernia 2001, 5(3):113-118.
20. Junge K, Klinge U, Rosch R, Klosterhalfen B, Schumpelick V. Functional and morphologic properties of a modified mesh for inguinal hernia repair. World J. Surg. 2002, 26(12):1472-1480.
21. Kirilova M, Stoytchev S, Pashkouleva D, Tsenova V, Hristoskova R. Visco-elastic mechanical properties of human abdominal fascia. J. Bodyw. Mov. Ther. 2009, 13(4):336-337.
22. Klinge U, Klosterhalfen B, Conze J, Limberg W, Obolenski B, Öttinger A, Schumpelick V. Modified mesh for hernia repair that is adapted to the physiology of the abdominal wall. Eur. J. Surg. 1998, 164(12):951-960.
23. Klinge U, Klosterhalfen B, Birkenhauer V, Junge K, Conze J, Schumpelick V. Impact of polymer pore size on the interface scar formation in a rat model. J. Surg. Res. 2002, 103(2):208-214.
24. Kohli N, Walsh PM, Roat TW, Karram MM. Mesh erosion after abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Obstet. Gynecol. 1998, 92(6):999-1004.
25. Krause H, Bennett M, Forwood M, Goh J. Biomechanical properties of raw meshes used in pelvic floor reconstruction. Int. Urogynecol. J. 2008, 19(12):1677-1681.
26. Kruger J, Hayward L, Nielsen P, Loiselle D, Kirton R. Design and development of a novel intra-vaginal pressure sensor. Int. Urogynecol. J. 2013, 24(10):1715-1721.
27. Leber GE, Garb JL, Alexander AI, Reed WP. Long-term complications associated with prosthetic repair of incisional hernias. Arch. Surg. 1998, 133(4):378-382.
28. Saberski E, Orenstein S, Novitsky Y. Anisotropic evaluation of synthetic surgical meshes. Hernia 2011, 15(1):47-52.
29. Schumpelick, V, Nyhus, LM. (Eds.), 2004. Meshes: Benefits and Risks. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
30. Schumpelick V, Nyhus LM, Schumpelick V, Nyhus L. Meshes: Benefits and Risks 2004, Springer.
31. Shek K, Wong V, Rane A, Goh J, Krause H, Lee J, Rosamilia A, Dietz H. How common is fixation failure after mesh kit surgery. Int. Urogynecol. J. 2012, 23(S2):154-155.
32. Shepherd JP, Feola AJ, Abramowitch SD, Moalli PA. Uniaxial biomechanical properties of seven different vaginally implanted meshes for pelvic organ prolapse. Int. Urogynecol. J. 2012, 23(5):613-620.
33. Velayudhan S, Martin D, Cooper-White J. Evaluation of dynamic creep properties of surgical mesh prostheses-Uniaxial fatigue. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part B: Appl. Biomater. 2009, 91(1):287-296.
34. Wong V, Shek K, Lee J, Rosamilia A, Rane A, Lyer J, Dietz HP. A comparison of two different forms of mesh fixation. Int. Urogynecol. J. 2012, 23(Suppl2):S124-126.