Moreover the adhesiogenic power of BP is absolutely lower than th

Moreover the adhesiogenic power of BP is absolutely lower than the one of the other synthetic materials [13, 14]. On the contrary there are a few doubts about the intra-peritoneal use of BP from the biomechanical point of view. It has been demonstrated AZD1152 mouse that the best integration is reached if they are placed pre-peritoneally with a greater incorporation strength, less adhesion area and lower adhesion scores compared with intra-peritoneal placement [15]. Given that the long-term persistence of the prosthesis is crucial, some authors stated that the BP durability

has a this website direct impact on the recurrence rate [16]. However durability depends on the implant intrinsic properties and also on the environment into which the BP are placed [16]. It has been demonstrated in animal models as the tensile strength is different between cross-linked and non-cross-linked meshes during the first months after the implant. However it reaches similar values after 12 months with the two kind of implants [8]. Moreover the strength of the repair sites doesn’t change over time. This might indicate that new tissue is deposited in the repair site as the scaffold is

degraded, preventing the site from weakening over time [8]. Another factor that should be kept into account in choosing which kind of BP to use is the demonstration that non-cross-linked material exhibits more favourable remodeling Proteasome inhibitor drugs characteristics [8]. This has a great importance when BP are used as bridging or alternatively as reinforcement. In fact discordant data have been published about the use of BP to bridge wide defects [16]. Few different non-randomized studies have been published reporting recurrence rate ranging between 100% and 0% if the prosthesis are placed respectively either as a bridge or not [16–19]. Even if high-quality comparative data about BP exist in animal models, only clinical reports of a restricted number of cases are reported for humans. Moreover only the recurrence rate is registered as outcome in almost all studies. Other data regarding the use of BP as wound classification, contamination risk/grade, associated therapy or comorbidity

are seldom reported. These data are needed to completely assess the usefulness, the efficacy not and the versatility of BP. All reported data derived by retrospective uncontrolled series of limited number of patients. The methodology is seldom reported and/or poorly described. Moreover the time to recurrence is rarely evaluated [16]. One last observation is that the different studies reported data about non-homogeneous cohorts of patients. Different surgical techniques, different surgeons’ skill and expertise in using BP and different hernia sites are often mixed together. These inconsistencies are probably due to the poorness of cases for each single centre. No definitive evidence based conclusions could be obtained from the literature.

Comments are closed.