In Vitro Degradation and In Vivo Skin sensitisation study of Hernia Mesh - Sterilized Partially Absorbable Tissue Separating Dual Layered Surgical Mesh
Main Article Content
Abstract
As hernia mesh implants are used to reinforce the abdominal wall, several complications can occur, such as hernia recurrence, abdominal pain, seroma formation and infection, depending on their biocompatibility. The polymer coated knitted mesh is used to repair hernias by providing a flexible scaffold. The objective of this study was to assess skin sensitisation potential of polar and non-polar extract and In Vitro degradation and In Vivo skin sensitisation pattern for polymer coated knitted mesh. The guinea pig maximization test (GPMT) is usually performed with one moderately irritant induction dose of the allergen and gives a qualitative assessment hazard identification of the allergenicity of the chemical. The apparent morphological change, weight, and strength loss rate of the mesh all showed the degrading impact. The degradation of polymer coated knitted mesh is performed to check polymer layer pattern after implantation.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Carmine W., Kim T., and Zhu D. Hernia Mesh and Hernia Repair : A Review. Engineered Regeneration. 2020 ; 1 : 19 - 33.
II. Luijendijik R. W., Wim C. J., Pettrousjka V. D. T., et al. A Comparison of Suture Repair with Mesh Repair for Incisional Hernia. The New England Journal of Medicine. 2000 ; 343 : 392 - 398.
III. Mudge M., and Hughes L. E. Incisional Hernia : A 10 year prospective study of incidence and attitudes. Br J Surg. 1985 ; 72 : 70 - 71.
IV. Helgstrand F., Rosenberg J., Kehlet H., Bisgaard T. Outcomes after emergency versus elective ventral Hernia Repair : A Prospective nationwide study. World J Surg. 2013 ; 37 (10) : 2273 - 2279. Doi : 10.1007/soo268-o13-2123-5.
V. Breuing K., Butler C. E., Ferzoco S., et al. Incisional ventral hernias : review of the literature and recommendations regarding the grading and technique of repair. Surgery. 2010 ; 148 (3) : 544 - 558. doi:10.1016/j.surg.2010.01.008.
VI. Montgomery A. The battle between biological and synthetic meshes in ventral hernia repair. Hernia. 2013 ; 17 (1) : 3 -11. doi:10.1007/s10029-013-1043-5.
VII. Martinez Serrano M. A., Pereira J. A., Sancho J., Argudo N., Lopez C. M., and Grande L. Specific improvement measure to reduce complications and mortality after urgent surgery in complicated abdominal wall hernia. Hernia. 2012 ; 16 (2) : 171 - 177. doi:10.1007/s10029-011-0875-0.
VIII. Derici H., Unalp H. R., Bozdag A. D., Nazli O., Tansug T., and Kamer E. Factor affecting morbidity and mortality in incarcerated abdominal wall hernias. Hernia. 2007 ; 11 (4) : 341 - 346.
IX. doi:10.1007/s10029-007-0226-3.
X. Landau O., and Kyzer S. Emergent laparoscopic repair of incarcerated incisional and ventral hernia. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech. 2004 ;18(9) : 1374 - 1376.
XI. Shah R. H., Sharma A., Khullar R., Soni V., Baijal M., and Chowbey P. K. Laparoscopic repair of incarcerated ventral abdominal wall hernias. Hernia. 2018 ; 12 (5) : 457 - 463.
XII. Olmi S., Cesana G., Erba L., and Croce E. Emergency laparoscopic treatment of acute incarcerated incisional hernia. Hernia. 2009 ; 13 (6) : 605 - 608.
XIII. Yang GPC, Chan CTY, Lai ECH, Chan OCY, Tang CN and Li MKW. Laparoscopic verus open repair for strangulated groin hernias : 188 cases over 4 years. Asian J Endosc Surg. 2012 ; 5 (3) : 131 - 137.
XIV. Venara A., Hubner M., Le N. P., Hamel J. F., Hamy A., and Demartines N. Surgery for incarcerated hernia : Short term outcome with or without mesh. Langenbeck’s Arch Surg. 2014 ; 399 (5) : 571 - 577.
XV. Luijendijk R. W., Hop WCJ, Van den Tol MP, et al. A comparison of suture repair with mesh repair for incisional hernia. N Engl J Med. 2000 ; 343 (6) : 392 - 398.
XVI. Abdel Baki NA, Bessa S. S., Abdel R. AH. Comparison of prosthesis mesh repair and tissue repair in the emergency management of incarcerated para umbilical hernia : a prospective randomized study. Hernia. 2007 ; 11 (2) : 163 -167.
XVII. Bessa S., and Abdel R. A. Results of prosthetic mesh repair in the emergency management of the acutely incarcerated and/or strangulated ventral hernias : a seven year study. Hernia. 2013 ; 17 (1) : 59 - 65.
XVIII. Mandala V., Bilardo G., Darca F. et al. Some considerations on the use of heterologous prostheses in incisional hernias at risk of infection. Hernia. 2000 ; 4 : 268 - 271.
XIX. Kelly M. E., and Behrman S. W. The safety and efficacy of prosthetic hernia repair in clean contaminated and contaminated wounds. Am Surg. 2002 ; 68 (6) : 524 - 528.
XX. Carbonell A. M., Criss C. N., Cobb W.S., Novitsky Y. W. and Rosen M. J. Outcomes of synthetic mesh in contaminated ventral hernia repairs. J Am Coll Surg. 2013 ; 217 (6) : 991 - 998.
XXI. Andersen, K. E., Volund, A., and Frankild, S. The guinea pig maximization test—with a multiple dose design. Acta Derm. Venereol. 1995 ; 75 : 463– 469.
XXII. Basketter D. A., Dearman R. J., Hilton J., and Kimber I. Dinitro - halobenzenes : Evaluation of relative skin sensitisation potential using the local lymph node assay. Contact Derm. 1997b ; 36 : 97 - 100.
XXIII. Basketter D. A., Scholes E. W., Chamberlain M., and Barratt M. D. An alternative strategy to the use of guinea pigs for the identification of skin sensitisation hazard. Food Chem. Toxicol. 1995 ; 33 (12) : 1051 - 1056.
XXIV. Gerberick G. F., and Robison M. K. A skin sensitisation risk assessment approach for evaluation of new ingredients and products. Am. J. Contact. Derm. 2000 ; 11 : 65 -73.
XXV. Hofmann T., Diehl K. H., Leist K. H., and Weigand W. The feasibility of sensitisation studies using fewer test animals. Arch Toxicol. 1987 ; 60 (6) : 470 - 471.
XXVI. Kimber I., Basketter D. A. et al. Skin sensitisation testing in potency and risk assessment. Toxicol Science. 2001 ; 59 (2) : 198 - 208.
XXVII. Kimber, I. Skin sensitisation Testing in Potency and Risk Assessment. Toxicological Sciences. 2001 ; 59 (2) : 198–208. doi:10.1093/toxsci/59.2.198
XXVIII. Kligman A. M., and Basketter D. A. A critical commentary and updating of the guinea pig maximization test. Contact Dermatitis. 1995 ; 32 : 129 - 134.
XXIX. Momma J., Kitajima S., and Inoue T. The guinea pig skin sensitisation test revisited : An evaluation formula to predict possible sensitisation guinea pig skin sensitisation test and its use in a risk assessment process for human skin sensitisation. Toxicology. 1998 ; 61 : 91 - 107.
XXX. Robinson M. K., Gerberich G. F., Ryan C. A., McNamee P., White I. and Basketter D. A. The importance of exposure estimation in the assessment of skin sensitisation risk. Contact Derm. 2000 ; 42 : 251 - 259.
XXXI. Shaillaker R. O., Bell G. M., Hodgson J. T., and Padgham M. D. Guinea pig maximization test for skin sensitisation : the use of fewer test animals. Arch Toxicol. 1989 ; 63 (4) : 283 - 288.
XXXII. Steiling W., Basketter D., Berthold K., Butler M. et al. Skin sensitisation testing - new perspectives and recommendations. Food Chem Toxicol. 2001 ; 39 (4) : 293 - 301.
XXXIII. Th. Maurer; R. Hess. The maximization test for skin sensitisation potential—Updating the standard protocol and validation of a modified protocol. 1989 ; 27 (12) : 807–811.
XXXIV. Van der walle, Klecak H. B., Geleik H., and Bensink T. Sensitizing potential of 14 mono (meth) acrylates in the guinea pig. 1982 ; 8 : 223 - 235.
XXXV. Wahlberg J. E., and Boman A. Guinea Pig Maximization Test. Curr Probl Dermatol. 1985 ; 14 : 59 - 106.