Short-term strength of non-penetrating mesh fixation: LifeMesh™, Tisseel™, and ProGrip

• Published in: Surgical endoscopy Vol. 31; no. 3; pp. 1350 - 1353
• Main Authors: Shahan, Charles P., Stoikes, Nathaniel N., Roan, Esra, Tatum, James, Webb, David L., Voeller, Guy R.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: New York Springer US 01.03.2017; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Abdominal Surgery; Animals; Biomechanical Phenomena; Biomechanics; Chronic pain; Clinical outcomes; Gastroenterology; Gynecology; Hepatology; Hernias; Herniorrhaphy - instrumentation; Herniorrhaphy - methods; Materials Testing; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Models, Animal; Polypropylenes; Proctology; Sealing compounds; Shear strength; Statistical analysis; Surgery; Surgical Mesh; Swine; United States > US; Hernia; Biomechanics; Mesh fixation; Fibrin sealants
• ISSN: 0930-2794; 1432-2218
• DOI: 10.1007/s00464-016-5119-z

Background Non-penetrating mesh fixation is becoming widely accepted even though little is known about the short-term fixation strength of these techniques. Although clinical outcomes are the ultimate measure of effectiveness, ex vivo biomechanical evaluation provides insights about the load-carrying capacity of the mesh–tissue complex in vivo. As such, the purpose of this study was to compare the short-term fixation strength of three unique non-penetrating methods of fixation: LifeMesh™, ProGrip™, and Tisseel™. Among these, LifeMesh™ is a novel technology where large-pore, mid-weight polypropylene mesh is embedded in a dry matrix of porcine gelatin and microbial transglutaminase enzyme, providing self-fixation without the need for a separate adhesive application. Methods Seven mongrel swine underwent implantation of two 4 × 7 cm pieces of either LifeMesh™, ProGrip™, or polypropylene mesh fixated with 2 mL of Tisseel™; 10 min after application, the samples were excised with the abdominal wall and stored for immediate biomechanical testing. The samples underwent lap shear testing to determine the short-term fixation strength of these three technologies. Results ProGrip™ demonstrated mean fixation strength of 1.3 N/cm (±STE 0.2). Mean fixation for mesh fixated with Tisseel™ was 2.6 N/cm (±STE 0.5). LifeMesh™ samples had mean fixation strength of 8.0 N/cm (±STE 2.1). Analysis of variance testing showed that interfacial strength of LifeMesh™ was significantly greater than that of either ProGrip™ or Tisseel™. ProGrip™ and Tisseel™ were not significantly different from each other ( p  = 0.06). Conclusions Short-term strength of mesh fixation is an undescribed factor in hernia repair, but could have significant implications for early recurrence and mesh contraction. While further investigation is needed to define adequate interfacial strength, this comparison of non-penetrating mesh fixation methods shows that the novel LifeMesh™ technology exhibits greater strength than other non-penetrating fixation techniques.