Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2008 May 26;13(5):185-91.

Tissue attachment strength and adhesion formation of intraabdominal fixed meshes with cyanoacrylat glues

Roland Ladurner  1 , I Drosse, S Seitz, W Plitz, G Barbaryka, M Siebeck, D Bürklein, C Kirchhoff, S Buhman, W Mutschler, M Schieker, T Mussack
Affiliations
  • PMID: 18559298

Tissue attachment strength and adhesion formation of intraabdominal fixed meshes with cyanoacrylat glues

Roland Ladurner et al. Eur J Med Res. .

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the technique of prosthetic mesh fixation in laparoscopic intraperitoneal incisional and ventral hernia repair using cyanoacrylat glue (Glubran GEM, Viareggio, Italy) in comparison with fixation methods using spiral tacks (Protack 5mm, Tyco) or transabdominal Prolene 4/0 sutures respectively.

Method: Through a midline laparotomy 3 pieces (3 x 3cm) of mesh (n = 60) where fixed onto the intact peritoneum on either side of a midline laparotomy in 10 New Zealand White rabbits. Two types of meshes where compared: ePTFE meshes (Gore-Tex Dual Mesh W.L. Gore and Associates, Inc. Medical Products Division, Flagstaff, Arizona, USA) and polypropylene/ polyvinylfluorid meshes (Dyna Mesh - IPOM P.J. Dahlhausen and Co. GmbH, Germany). All animals were killed after 12 weeks. Upon scoring of the adhesions the prosthetic materials were excised en bloc with the anterior abdominal wall for tensile strength analysis and histologic evaluation.

Results: In contrast to ePTFE meshes fixed with cyanoacrylat glue, PP meshes fixed with transabdominal sutures as well as with spiral tacks showed the highest percentage and tenacity of adhesions (p<0.033). Independent of the method of fixation, ePTFE meshes revealed a significantly higher shrinkage than PP prosthesis (41% vs 17% related to original mesh surface; p<0.033). The strength of the mesh incorporation was significantly higher in PP meshes (p<0.033). Fixation of PP meshes with cyanoacrylat glue showed an equivalent tensile strength as ePTFE meshes fixed with spiral tacks (6.6 +/- 2.7 N vs 6.6 +/- 3.1N).

Conclusion: In this rabbit model, intraabdominal fixation of PP composite meshes with cyanoacrylat glue was equivalent to ePTFE mesh fixation with spiral tacks concerning tensile strength analysis. Adhesions between mesh and abdominal wall were found more frequently after PP fixation. In contrast, mesh shrinkage was more evident after ePTFE mesh implantation.

PubMed Disclaimer