Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2000
Abstract Comparisons were made of the tissue response to the implantation of two different polytetrafluoroethylene prostheses: Soft Tissue Patch (STP) and Mycro Mesh (MM). A 7 × 5 cm prosthesis of STP (n=12) or MM (n=12) was implanted into a defect of the same size (involving all layers except skin) created in the anterior abdominal wall in 24 New Zealand rabbits. The prostheses were anchored to the recipient tissue, in direct contact with the intestinal loops and connective tissue. After 14, 30, 60 and 90 days, groups of six implants were studied macroscopically and samples were taken to be processed by light microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), immunohistochemical studies and tensiometry. All animals were valid for the study. In three cases STP implants presented very loose adhesions in the peripheral zones corresponding to the sutures. They were also observed on three MM implants, in the area of the perforations. Light and scanning microscopy revealed the formation of a capsule of scar tissue surrounding both types of prosthesis. At day 90, bridges of connective tissue had formed in the perforated areas of MM. Good vascularization was established in the areas of recipient tissue corresponding to both implants. The macrophage reaction to both biomaterials was maximal at 14 days, after which it progressively decreased until day 90. Tensile testing revealed no significant differences between the two biomaterials. It is concluded that (a) behaviour in the peritoneal interface is similar in the two prostheses, (b) both biomaterials become encapsulated rather than integrated into the recipient tissue, (c) the foreign body reaction does not determine the success or failure of the implants, (d) The perforations of the MM prosthesis do not increase its resistance to stress, or at least not after 90 days of implantation into rabbit abdominal wall.
Type of Medium: