Abstract
Introduction and hypothesis
To improve our understanding of the differences in commonly used synthetic prolapse meshes, we compared four newer generation meshes to Gynecare PS™ using a tensile testing protocol. We hypothesize that the newer meshes have inferior biomechanical properties.
Methods
Meshes were loaded to failure (n = 5 per group) generating load–elongation curves from which the stiffness, the load at failure, and the relative elongation were determined. Additional mesh samples (n = 3) underwent a cyclic loading protocol to measure permanent elongation in response to subfailure loading.
Results
With the exception of Popmesh, which displayed uniform stiffness, other meshes were characterized by a bilinear behavior. Newer meshes were 70–90% less stiff than Gynecare™ (p < 0.05) and more readily deformed in response to uniaxial and cyclical loading (p < 0.001).
Conclusion
Relative to Gynecare™, the newer generation of prolapse meshes were significantly less stiff, with irreversible deformation at significantly lower loads.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Pulliam SJ, Ferzandi TR, Hota LS, Elkadry EA et al (2007) Use of synthetic Mesh in pelvic reconstructive surgery: a survey of attitudes and practice pattern of urogynecologists. Int Urogynecol J 11:1–9
Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, Connolly A Cundiff G, Weber AM, Zyczynski H, Pelvic Floor Disorders Network (2004) Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol 104:805–823
Nicita G (1998) A new operation for genitourinary prolapse. J Urol 160:741–745
Floof CG, Drutz HP, Waja L (1998) Anterior colporrhaphy reinforced with Marlex. Mesh for treatment of cystocele. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 9:200–2004
Jameson JS, Chia YW, Kamm MA et al (1994) Effects of age, sex, and parity on anorectal function. Br J Surg 81:1689–1692
Jones NHJ, Healy JC, King LJ (2003) Pelvic Connective Tissue resilience decreases with vaginal delivery, menopause and uterine prolapse. Br J Surg 90:466–472
Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstom JO et al (1997) Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 89:501–506
Chen CG, Ridgeway B, Paraiso MF (2007) Biologic grafts and Synthetic meshes in pelvic reconstructive Surgery. Clin Obstet and Gynecol 50(2):383–411
Dora C, Dimarco D, Zobitz M, Elliot D (2004) Time dependent variations in biomechanical properties of cadaveric fascia, porcine dermis, porcine small intestine submucosa, polypropylene mesh and autologous fascia in the rabbit model: implication for sling surgery. J Urol 171:1970–1973
Fenner DE (2000) New surgical mesh. Clin Obstet Gynecol 43:647–652
Amrute K, Badlani G (2006) Female incontinence: a review of biomaterials and minimally invasive techniques. Current Opinion Urol 16:54–59
Cosson M, Debodinance P, Boukerrou M, Chauvet MP, Lobry P, Crepin G, Ego A (2003) Mechanical properties of synthetic implants used in repair of prolapse and urinary incontinence in women: which is the ideal material. Int Urogynecol J 14:169–178
Amid PK (1997) Classification of biomaterials and their related complications in abdominal wall surgery. Hernia 1:15–21
Moalli PM, Papas N, Menefee S Abramowitch S (2008) Tensile properties of six commonly used mid-urethral slings. Int Urogynecol J 19:655–663
Kohli N, Walsh PM, Roat TW, Karram MM (1998) Mesh erosion after abdominal sacrocolpopexy. Obstet Gynecol 92:999–1004
Mistrangelo E, Mancuso S, Nadalini C, Lijoi D, Costantini L (2007) Rising use of synthetic mesh in transvaginal pelvic reconstructive surgery: A review of risk of vaginal erosion. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 14:564–569
Huebner M, Fenner DE (2006) The use of graft material in vaginal pelvic floor surgery. Int J Obstet Gynecol 92:279–288
Isom-Batz G, Zimmern PE (2007) Vaginal mesh for incontinence and/or prolapse: caution required!. Expert Rev Med Devices 4:675–679
Conflicts of interest
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jones, K.A., Feola, A., Meyn, L. et al. Tensile properties of commonly used prolapse meshes. Int Urogynecol J 20, 847–853 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-008-0781-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-008-0781-x