PURPOSE: Electrospun meshes may be considered as substitutes to textile polypropylene implants. We compared the host response and biomechanical properties of the rat abdominal wall following reinforcement with either polycaprolactone (PCL) modified with ureidopyrimidinone-motifs (UPy) or polypropylene mesh. METHODS: First we measured the response to cyclic uniaxial load within the physiological range both dry (room temperature) and wet (body temperature). 36 rats underwent primary repair of a full-thickness abdominal wall defect with a polypropylene suture (native tissue repair), or reinforced with either UPy-PCL or ultra-light weight polypropylene mesh (n = 12/group). Sacrifice was at 7 and 42 days. Outcomes were compliance of explants, mesh dimensions, graft related complications and semi-quantitative assessment of inflammatory cell (sub) types, neovascularization and remodeling. RESULTS: Dry UPy-PCL implants are less stiff than polypropylene, both are more compliant in wet conditions. Polypropylene loses stiffness on cyclic loading. Both implant types were well incorporated without clinically obvious degradation or herniation. Exposure rates were similar (n = 2/12) as well as mesh contraction. There was no reinforcement at low loads, while, at higher tension, polypropylene explants were much stiffer than UPy-PCL. The latter was initially weaker yet by 42 days it had a compliance similar to native abdominal wall. There were eventually more foreign body giant cells around UPy-PCL fibers yet the amount of M1 subtype macrophages was higher than in polypropylene explants. There were less neovascularization and collagen deposition. CONCLUSION: Abdominal wall reconstruction with electrospun UPy-PCL mesh does not compromise physiologic tissue biomechanical properties, yet provokes a vivid inflammatory reaction.

Centre for Surgical Technologies KU Leuven Leuven Belgium

Coloplast A S Global R and D Biomaterials Holtedam Humlebæk Denmark

Department of Development and Regeneration KU Leuven Leuven Belgium

Department of Urology University Hospitals Leuven Leuven Belgium

EMPA Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology Dübendorf Switzerland

INEGI Faculdade de Engenharia da Universidade do Porto Porto Portugal

Institute for the Care of Mother and Child Charles University Prague Czech Republic

Institute of Mechanical Systems ETH Zurich Zurich Switzerland

Pelvic Floor Unit University Hospitals KU Leuven Leuven Belgium

References provided by Crossref.org