Today: Nov 22, 2024
RU / EN
Last update: Oct 30, 2024
Prosthetic Repair of the Abdominal Wall Using Light and Ultra-Light Synthetic and Titan-Containing Materials in High Bacterial Contamination (Experimental Study)

Prosthetic Repair of the Abdominal Wall Using Light and Ultra-Light Synthetic and Titan-Containing Materials in High Bacterial Contamination (Experimental Study)

Parshikov V.V., Mironov A.A., Anikina E.A., Zaslavskaya M.I., Alyokhin A.I., Kazantsev A.A.
Key words: prosthetic repair; mesh; hernia; contamination.
2015, volume 7, issue 4, page 64.

Full text

html pdf
1919
2077

The aim of the investigation was to study the course of the reparative process in the early postoperative period after the abdominal wall prosthetic repair using light and ultra-light materials in bacterial contamination in experiment.

Materials and Methods. Retromuscular abdominal wall repair was modeled on rats using light (ultra-light) endoprostheses contaminated by Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli in the Central Research Laboratory of Nizhny Novgorod State Medical Academy. The course of the early postoperative period has been studied, characteristic features of the inflammatory reaction depending on the microorganism cultures and mesh used have been evaluated with the help of the original rating scale.

Results. Prosthetic repair in bacterial contamination in experiment is accompanied by a marked inflammatory reaction. Changes are statistically more significant after infecting by E. coli culture. The most intensive inflammation is observed on day 3 (S. aureus) and day 5 (E. coli) after the intervention with the regression of the process by day 14. On day 3‒7 after the operation in group E. coli the inflammatory reaction was more expressed after TiMesh implantation relative to PP Light application, whereas in group S. aureus it was more significant in case of PP Light application.

Conclusion. Using light and ultra-light mesh in a compromised area of surgical intervention in abdominal wall prosthetic repair is possible by stringent indications taking into account potential usefulness and high risk, possessing adequate experience, and observing a number of conditions. Endoprosthesis should not be placed in contact with the zone of maximum contamination.

  1. Nieuwenhuizen J., Eker H.H., Timmermans L., Hop W.C.J., Kleinrensink G.-J., Jeekel J., Lange J.F.; PRIMA Trialist Group. A double blind randomized controlled trial comparing primary suture closure with mesh augmented closure to reduce incisional hernia incidence. BMC Surg 2013; 13: 48, http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2482-13-48.
  2. Iurasov A.V., Shestakov A.L., Kurashvili D.N., Abovian L.A. The modern concept of surgical treatment of patients with postoperative hernias of the anterior abdominal wall. Vestnik eksperimental’noy i klinicheskoy khirurgii 2014; 4: 405–413.
  3. Narezkin D.V., Sergeev E.V. Problemy primeneniya setchatykh endoprotezov pri gryzhesechenii ushchemlennykh posleoperatsionnykh ventral’nykh gryzh. V kn.: Materialy X nauchnoy konferentsii “Aktual'nye voprosy gerniologii” [Problems of using mesh endoprostheses in herniotomy of strangulated postoperative ventral hernias. In: Proceedings of Х Scientific Conference “Actual problems of hernitology”]. Moscow; 2013; p. 102–104.
  4. Kukosh M.V., Vlasov A.V., Gomozov G.I. Prevention of early postoperative complications at endoprosthesis of ventral hernias. Novosti khirurgii 2012; 20(5): 32–37.
  5. Vlasov А.V., Kukosh М.V. The problem of wound complications in abdominal wall endoprosthesis replacement in ventral hernias. Sovremennye tehnologii v medicine 2013; 2: 116–124.
  6. Sartelli M., Coccolini F., van Ramshorst G.H., Campanelli G., Mandalà V., Ansaloni L., Moore E.E., Peitzman A., Velmahos G., Moore F.A., Leppaniemi A., Burlew C.C., Biffl W., Koike K., Kluger Y., Fraga G.P., Ordonez C.A., Di Saverio S., Agresta F., Sakakushev B., Gerych I., Wani I., Kelly M.D., Gomes C.A., Faro M.P. Jr., Taviloglu K., Demetrashvili Z., Lee J.G., Vettoretto N., Guercioni G., Tranа C., Cui Y., Kok K.Y., Ghnnam W.M., Abbas Ael-S., Sato N., Marwah S.,Rangarajan M., Ben-Ishay O., Adesunkanmi A.R., Segovia Lohse H.A., Kenig J., Mandalà S., Patrizi A., Scibé R., Catena F. WSES guidelines for emergency repair of complicated abdominal wall hernias. World J Emerg Surg 2013; 8(1): 50, http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1749-7922-8-50.
  7. Zafar H., Zaidi M., Qadir I., Memon A.A. Emergency incisional hernia repair: a difficult problem waiting for a solution. Ann Surg Innov Res 2012; 6(1): 1, http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1750-1164-6-1.
  8. Golovin R.V., Nikitin N.A., Prokopiev A.A. Prognosis of development of complications of injuries after combined allohernia plastic interventions for postoperative ventral hernias of median localisation. Sovremennye problemy nauki i obrazovaniya 2014; 2. URL: www.science-education.ru/116-12914.
  9. Sonis A.G., Grachev B.D., Stolyarov E.A., Ishutov I.V. Prevention and treatment of infection wound complications at prosthetic hernia repair. Rany i ranevye infektsii 2014; 2(1): 16–23.
  10. Bahar M.M., Nooghabi A.J., Nooghabi M.J., Jangjoo A. The role of prophylactic cefazolin in the prevention of infection after various types of abdominal wall hernia repair with mesh. Asian J Surg 2015, 38(3): 139–144, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asjsur.2015.01.006.
  11. Cobb W.S., Warren J.A., Ewing J.A., Burnikel A., Merchant M., Carbonell A.M. Open retromuscular mesh repair of complex incisional hernia: predictors of wound events and recurrence. J Am Coll Surg 2015; 220(4): 606–613, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.12.055.
  12. Petter-Pucher A.H., Fortelny R.H. The heart of darkness. Hernia 2015; 19(2): 195–196, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10029-014-1336-3.
  13. Abdominal’naya khirurgicheskaya infektsiya. Rossiyskie natsional’nye rekomendatsii [Abdominal Surgical Infection. Russian national recommendations]. Otv. red. Savel’ev V.S., Gel’fand B.R. [Savel’ev V.S., Gel’fand B.R. (editors)]. Moscow; 2011.
  14. Strategiya i taktika primeneniya antimikrobnykh sredstv v lechebnykh uchrezhdeniyakh Rossii. Rossiyskie natsional'nye rekomendatsii [Strategy and tactics of applying antimicrobial means in the health care settings in Russia. Russian national recommendations]. Pod red. Savel’eva V.S., Gel’fanda B.R., Yakovleva S.V. Moscow; 2012.
  15. Hоiby N., Ciofu O., Johansen H.K., Song Z.J., Moser C., Jensen P.О., Molin S., Givskov M., Tolker-Nielsen T., Bjarnsholt T. The clinical impact of bacterial biofilms. Int J Oral Sci 2011; 3(2): 55–65, http://dx.doi.org/10.4248/IJOS11026.
  16. Kathju S., Nistico L., Melton-Kreft R., Lasko L.A., Stoodley P. Direct demonstration of bacterial biofilms on prosthetic mesh after ventral herniorrhaphy. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2015; 16(1): 45–53, http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/sur.2014.026.
  17. Cargill J.S., Upton M. Low concentrations of vancomycin stimulates biofilm formation in some clinical isolates of Staphylococcus epidermidis. J Clin Pathol 2009; 62(12): 1112–1116, http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jcp.2009.069021.
  18. Chebotar I.V., Mayansky А.N., Konchakova Е.D., Lazareva А.V., Chistyakova V.P. Antimicrobial resistance of bacteria in biofilms. Klinicheskaya mikrobiologiya i antimikrobnaya antibiotikoterapiya 2012; 1(14): 51–58.
  19. Primus F.E., Harris H.W. A critical review of biologic mesh use in ventral hernia repairs under contaminated conditions. Hernia 2013; 17(1): 21–30, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10029-012-1037-8.
  20. Rukovodstvo po laboratornym zhivotnym i al'ternativnym modelyam v biomeditsinskikh tekhnologiyakh [Guidelines on laboratory animals and alternative models in biomedical technologies]. Pod red. Karkishchenko N.N., Gracheva S.V. [Karkishchenko N.N., Gracheva S.V. (editors)]. Moscow; 2010.
  21. Klinge U., Klosterhalfen B. Modified classification of surgical meshes for hernia repair based on the analyses of 1,000 explanted meshes. Hernia 2012; 16(3): 251–258, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10029-012-0913-6.
  22. Zhukovsky V.A. Polimernye endoprotezy dlya gernioplastiki [Polymer implants for hernia repair]. Saint Petersburg: Eskulap; 2011.
  23. Coda A., Lamberti R., Martorana S. Classification of prosthetics used in hernia repair based on weight and biomaterial. Hernia 2012; 16(1): 9–20, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10029-011-0868-z.
  24. Rezolyutsiya Х nauchnoy konferentsii “Aktual'nye voprosy gerniologii” [Resolution of Х scientific conference “Urgent problems of herniology”]. Moscow; 2013. URL: http://herniaweb.ru/index.php?cat_id=30.
  25. Pushkin S.Yu., Belokonev V.I. Treatment of medial ventral hernias with the use of synthetic endoprosthesis. Khirurgiia 2010; 6: 43–45.
  26. Vorovskii O.O. Interaction of composite mesh implanted with peritoneum abdominoplasty. Rossiyskiy mediko-biologicheskiy vestnik im. akademika I.P. Pavlova 2013; 3: 118–123.
  27. Protasov A.V., Krivtsov G.A., Mikhaleva L.M., Tabuika A.V., Shukhtin N.Yu. Effects of inguinal hernioplasty mesh implant on reproductive function. Khirurgiia 2010; 8: 28–32.
  28. Kochetkov A.V., Gudilov M.S. Clinical and laboratory diagnosis and monitoring of septic complications after abdominal operations. Novosti khirurgii 2015; 23(1): 105–111.
  29. Bondarev V.A., Kchibekov E.A., Topchiev M.A. Otsenka techeniya ranevogo protsessa pri ushchemlennykh gryzhakh peredney bryushnoy stenki. V kn.: Materialy X nauchnoy konferentsii “Aktual’nye voprosy gerniologii” [Assessment of the wound healing process in strangulated ventral hernias. In: Proceedings of Х scientific conference “Actual problems of hernitology”]. Moscow; 2013; p. 28–30. URL: http://herniaweb.ru/index.php?cat_id=63.
  30. Sanders D., Lambie J., Bond P., Moate R., Steer J.A. An in vitro study assessing the effect of mesh morphology and suture fixation on bacterial adherence. Hernia 2013; 17(6): 779–789, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10029-013-1124-5.
  31. Parshikov V.V., Chebotar I.V., Khodak V.A., Samsonov A.A. In vitro studies of biofilms on the surface of synthetic macroporous endoprostheses for abdominal wall plasty. Sovremennye tehnologii v medicine 2012; 1: 15–20.
  32. Reslinski A., Dabrowiecki S., Glowacka K. The impact of diclofenac and ibuprofen on biofilm formation on the surface of polypropylene mesh. Hernia 2015; 19(2): 179–185, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10029-013-1200-x.
  33. Pérez-Köhler B., Sotomayor S., Rodríguez M., Gegúndez M.I., Pascual G., Bellon J.M. Bacterial adhesion to biological versus polymer prosthetic materials used in abdominal wall defect repair: do these meshes show any differences in vitro? Hernia 2015, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10029-015-1378-1 [Epub ahead of print].
  34. Mayansky A.N., Chebotar I.V. Staphylococcal biofilms: structure, regulation, rejection. Zh Mikrobiol Epidemiol Immunobiol 2011; 1: 101–108.
  35. Chebotar I.V., Konchakova E.D., Evteeva N.I. Neutrophil dependent breakdown of biofilms formed by Staphylococcus aureus. Zh Mikrobiol Epidemiol Immunobiol 2012; 1: 10–15.
  36. Kuznetsov A.V., Shestakov V.V., Smarzh T.M. Results of herniotomies at infected tissues at different ways antibiotic prophylaxis. Meditsina i obrazovanie v Sibiri 2014; 3. URL: http://ngmu.ru/cozo/mos/article/pdf.php?id=1404.
Parshikov V.V., Mironov A.A., Anikina E.A., Zaslavskaya M.I., Alyokhin A.I., Kazantsev A.A. Prosthetic Repair of the Abdominal Wall Using Light and Ultra-Light Synthetic and Titan-Containing Materials in High Bacterial Contamination (Experimental Study). Sovremennye tehnologii v medicine 2015; 7(4): 64, https://doi.org/10.17691/stm2015.7.4.08


Journal in Databases

pubmed_logo.jpg

web_of_science.jpg

scopus.jpg

crossref.jpg

ebsco.jpg

embase.jpg

ulrich.jpg

cyberleninka.jpg

e-library.jpg

lan.jpg

ajd.jpg

SCImago Journal & Country Rank