Sepramesh vs. Dualmesh for abdominal wall hernia repairs in a rabbit model

Ricardo M. Young, Robert Gustafson, Robert C. Dinsmore

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the relative strength of incorporation and adhesion formation for mesh hernia repairs performed with Sepramesh (Genzyme Corp., Cambridge, Massachusetts) and Dualmesh (WL Gore and Assoc., Flagstaff, Arizona). Methods: A prospective randomized study was conducted using 30 New Zealand white rabbits, with 15 animals randomized to each limb. A standardized abdominal defect was created in each animal. The defect was then repaired using either Sepramesh or Dualmesh. Animals were sacrificed at 4 weeks. The area of adhesions was determined using digital analysis of inked specimens. Strength of incorporation was determined using an Instron Tensiometer. (Department of Clinical Research, D. D. Eisenhower Army Medical Center, Fort Gordon, GA 30905.) Results: Sepramesh had a 30.6% stronger strength of incorporation compared with Dualmesh.(p = 0.011) The difference in area of adhesions was not statistically significant between the 2 products. Conclusions: The use of Sepramesh for abdominal hernia repairs provides a significantly stronger strength of incorporation without increasing the amount of adhesions as compared with Dualmesh.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)77-79
Number of pages3
JournalCurrent surgery
Volume61
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2004

Fingerprint

Abdominal Hernia
Herniorrhaphy
Abdominal Wall
animal
Rabbits
military
New Zealand
Extremities
Prospective Studies
sepramesh
Research

Keywords

  • Adhesion prevention
  • Dualmesh
  • Mesh hernia repair
  • Sepramesh

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Sepramesh vs. Dualmesh for abdominal wall hernia repairs in a rabbit model. / Young, Ricardo M.; Gustafson, Robert; Dinsmore, Robert C.

In: Current surgery, Vol. 61, No. 1, 01.01.2004, p. 77-79.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Young, Ricardo M. ; Gustafson, Robert ; Dinsmore, Robert C. / Sepramesh vs. Dualmesh for abdominal wall hernia repairs in a rabbit model. In: Current surgery. 2004 ; Vol. 61, No. 1. pp. 77-79.
@article{608fdf3de1e246ca86b47530f4a496e9,
title = "Sepramesh vs. Dualmesh for abdominal wall hernia repairs in a rabbit model",
abstract = "Purpose: To compare the relative strength of incorporation and adhesion formation for mesh hernia repairs performed with Sepramesh (Genzyme Corp., Cambridge, Massachusetts) and Dualmesh (WL Gore and Assoc., Flagstaff, Arizona). Methods: A prospective randomized study was conducted using 30 New Zealand white rabbits, with 15 animals randomized to each limb. A standardized abdominal defect was created in each animal. The defect was then repaired using either Sepramesh or Dualmesh. Animals were sacrificed at 4 weeks. The area of adhesions was determined using digital analysis of inked specimens. Strength of incorporation was determined using an Instron Tensiometer. (Department of Clinical Research, D. D. Eisenhower Army Medical Center, Fort Gordon, GA 30905.) Results: Sepramesh had a 30.6{\%} stronger strength of incorporation compared with Dualmesh.(p = 0.011) The difference in area of adhesions was not statistically significant between the 2 products. Conclusions: The use of Sepramesh for abdominal hernia repairs provides a significantly stronger strength of incorporation without increasing the amount of adhesions as compared with Dualmesh.",
keywords = "Adhesion prevention, Dualmesh, Mesh hernia repair, Sepramesh",
author = "Young, {Ricardo M.} and Robert Gustafson and Dinsmore, {Robert C.}",
year = "2004",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.cursur.2003.09.011",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "61",
pages = "77--79",
journal = "Journal of Surgical Education",
issn = "1931-7204",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Sepramesh vs. Dualmesh for abdominal wall hernia repairs in a rabbit model

AU - Young, Ricardo M.

AU - Gustafson, Robert

AU - Dinsmore, Robert C.

PY - 2004/1/1

Y1 - 2004/1/1

N2 - Purpose: To compare the relative strength of incorporation and adhesion formation for mesh hernia repairs performed with Sepramesh (Genzyme Corp., Cambridge, Massachusetts) and Dualmesh (WL Gore and Assoc., Flagstaff, Arizona). Methods: A prospective randomized study was conducted using 30 New Zealand white rabbits, with 15 animals randomized to each limb. A standardized abdominal defect was created in each animal. The defect was then repaired using either Sepramesh or Dualmesh. Animals were sacrificed at 4 weeks. The area of adhesions was determined using digital analysis of inked specimens. Strength of incorporation was determined using an Instron Tensiometer. (Department of Clinical Research, D. D. Eisenhower Army Medical Center, Fort Gordon, GA 30905.) Results: Sepramesh had a 30.6% stronger strength of incorporation compared with Dualmesh.(p = 0.011) The difference in area of adhesions was not statistically significant between the 2 products. Conclusions: The use of Sepramesh for abdominal hernia repairs provides a significantly stronger strength of incorporation without increasing the amount of adhesions as compared with Dualmesh.

AB - Purpose: To compare the relative strength of incorporation and adhesion formation for mesh hernia repairs performed with Sepramesh (Genzyme Corp., Cambridge, Massachusetts) and Dualmesh (WL Gore and Assoc., Flagstaff, Arizona). Methods: A prospective randomized study was conducted using 30 New Zealand white rabbits, with 15 animals randomized to each limb. A standardized abdominal defect was created in each animal. The defect was then repaired using either Sepramesh or Dualmesh. Animals were sacrificed at 4 weeks. The area of adhesions was determined using digital analysis of inked specimens. Strength of incorporation was determined using an Instron Tensiometer. (Department of Clinical Research, D. D. Eisenhower Army Medical Center, Fort Gordon, GA 30905.) Results: Sepramesh had a 30.6% stronger strength of incorporation compared with Dualmesh.(p = 0.011) The difference in area of adhesions was not statistically significant between the 2 products. Conclusions: The use of Sepramesh for abdominal hernia repairs provides a significantly stronger strength of incorporation without increasing the amount of adhesions as compared with Dualmesh.

KW - Adhesion prevention

KW - Dualmesh

KW - Mesh hernia repair

KW - Sepramesh

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0742306080&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0742306080&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.cursur.2003.09.011

DO - 10.1016/j.cursur.2003.09.011

M3 - Article

C2 - 14972176

AN - SCOPUS:0742306080

VL - 61

SP - 77

EP - 79

JO - Journal of Surgical Education

JF - Journal of Surgical Education

SN - 1931-7204

IS - 1

ER -