Effect on the tensile strength of human acellular dermis (Epiflex®) of in-vitro incubation simulating an open abdomen setting

BMC Surgery

Eric Dominic Rössner³  Peter Hohenberger³  Lothar R Pilz⁴  Matthias Oechsner¹  Hans Haupt¹  Torsten J Schulze²  Florian Herrle³  Michael Mularczyk¹  Mario Vitacolonna³ 

[1] Center for structural Materials, State Material Testing Institute Darmstadt (MPA), Chair and Institute for Material Science (IfW), Technische Universität Darmstadt, Darmstadt, Germany;German Red Cross Blood Service, Baden Württemberg-Hessen, Medical Faculty of Mannheim, Institute of Transfusion Medicine and Immunology, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany;Division of Surgical Oncology and Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Theodor Kutzer Ufer 1-3, 68167 Mannheim, Germany;Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany

关键词: Biologicals;    Breaking strength;    Open abdomen;    Acellular dermis;   

Others  :  866886
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2482-14-7

 received in 2013-06-09, accepted in 2014-01-21,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

The use of human acellular dermis (hAD) to close open abdomen in the treatment process of severe peritonitis might be an alternative to standard care. This paper describes an investigation of the effects of fluids simulating an open abdomen environment on the biomechanical properties of Epiflex® a cell-free human dermis transplant.

Methods

hAD was incubated in Ringers solution, blood, urine, upper gastrointestinal (upper GI) secretion and a peritonitis-like bacterial solution in-vitro for 3 weeks. At day 0, 7, 14 and 21 breaking strength was measured, tensile strength was calculated and standard fluorescence microscopy was performed.

Results

hAD incubated in all five of the five fluids showed a decrease in mean breaking strength at day 21 when compared to day 0. However, upper GI secretion was the only incubation fluid that significantly reduced the mechanical strength of Epiflex after 21days of incubation when compared to incubation in Ringer’s solution.

Conclusion

hAD may be a suitable material for closure of the open abdomen in the absence of upper GI leakage and pancreatic fistulae.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Vitacolonna et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Losee JE, Smith DM: Acellular dermal matrix in palatoplasty. Aesthet Surg J 2011, 31(7 Suppl):108S-115S.
• [2]Bengtson BP, Baxter RA: Emerging applications for acellular dermal matrices in mastopexy. Clin Plast Surg 2012, 39(2):159-166.
• [3]Taner T, Cima RR, Larson DW, Dozois EJ, Pemberton JH, Wolff BG: The use of human acellular dermal matrix for parastomal hernia repair in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a novel technique to repair fascial defects. Dis Colon Rectum 2009, 52(2):349-354.
• [4]Rossner E, Smith MD, Petschke B, Schmidt K, Vitacolonna M, Syring C, von Versen R, Hohenberger P: Epiflex((R)) a new decellularised human skin tissue transplant: manufacture and properties. Cell Tissue Bank 2011, 12(3):209-217.
• [5]Scott BG, Welsh FJ, Pham HQ, Carrick MM, Liscum KR, Granchi TS, Wall MJ Jr, Mattox KL, Hirshberg A: Early aggressive closure of the open abdomen. J Trauma 2006, 60(1):17-22.
• [6]Adetayo OA, Salcedo SE, Bahjri K, Gupta SC: A meta-analysis of outcomes using acellular dermal matrix in breast and abdominal wall reconstructions: event rates and risk factors predictive of complications. Ann Plast Sur 2011.
• [7]Singh MK, Rocca JP, Rochon C, Facciuto ME, Sheiner PA, Rodriguez-Davalos MI: Open abdomen management with human acellular dermal matrix in liver transplant recipients. Transplant Proceed 2008, 40(10):3541-3544.
• [8]de Moya MA, Dunham M, Inaba K, Bahouth H, Alam HB, Sultan B, Namias N: Long-term outcome of acellular dermal matrix when used for large traumatic open abdomen. J Trauma 2008, 65(2):349-353.
• [9]Diaz JJ Jr, Conquest AM, Ferzoco SJ, Vargo D, Miller P, Wu YC, Donahue R: Multi-institutional experience using human acellular dermal matrix for ventral hernia repair in a compromised surgical field. Archiv Surgery 2009, 144(3):209-215.
• [10]Roessner ED, Vitacolonna M, Hohenberger P: Confocal laser scanning microscopy evaluation of an acellular dermis tissue transplant (Epiflex(R)). PloS One 2012, 7(10):e45991.
• [11]Ateshian GA, Wang H: Rolling resistance of articular cartilage due to interstitial fluid flow. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 1997, 211(5):419-424.
• [12]Buehler MJ: Nanomechanics of collagen fibrils under varying cross-link densities: atomistic and continuum studies. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2008, 1(1):59-67.
• [13]Vargo D, Richardson JD, Campbell A, Chang M, Fabian T, Franz M, Kaplan M, Moore F, Reed RL, Scott B, et al.: Management of the open abdomen: from initial operation to definitive closure. Am Surg 2009, 75(11):S1-S22.
• [14]Van Hensbroek Boele P, Wind J, Dijkgraaf MG, Busch OR, Carel Goslings J: Temporary closure of the open abdomen: a systematic review on delayed primary fascial closure in patients with an open abdomen. World J Surg 2009, 33(2):199-207.
• [15]Regner JL, Kobayashi L, Coimbra R: Surgical strategies for management of the open abdomen. World J Surg 2012, 36(3):497-510.
• [16]Jernigan TW, Fabian TC, Croce MA, Moore N, Pritchard FE, Minard G, Bee TK: Staged management of giant abdominal wall defects: acute and long-term results. Annal Surg 2003, 238(3):349-355. discussion 355–347
• [17]Demetriades D: Total management of the open abdomen. Inter Wound J 2012, 9(Suppl 1):17-24.
• [18]Bee TK, Croce MA, Magnotti LJ, Zarzaur BL, Maish GO 3rd, Minard G, Schroeppel TJ, Fabian TC: Temporary abdominal closure techniques: a prospective randomized trial comparing polyglactin 910 mesh and vacuum-assisted closure. J Trauma 2008, 65(2):337-342. discussion 342–334
• [19]Prichayudh S, Sriussadaporn S, Samorn P, Pak-Art R, Kritayakirana K, Capin A: Management of open abdomen with an absorbable mesh closure. Surgery Today 2011, 41(1):72-78.
• [20]DeMaria EJ, Moss JM, Sugerman HJ: Laparoscopic intraperitoneal polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) prosthetic patch repair of ventral hernia. Prospective comparison to open prefascial polypropylene mesh repair. Surg Endos 2000, 14(4):326-329.
• [21]Wondberg D, Larusson HJ, Metzger U, Platz A, Zingg U: Treatment of the open abdomen with the commercially available vacuum-assisted closure system in patients with abdominal sepsis: low primary closure rate. World J Surg 2008, 32(12):2724-2729.
• [22]Quyn AJ, Johnston C, Hall D, Chambers A, Arapova N, Ogston S, Amin AI: The open abdomen and temporary abdominal closure systems - historical evolution and systematic review. Col Dis Offic J Ass Coloproctol Gr Br Irel 2012, 14(8):e429-e438.
• [23]Hollinsky C, Sandberg S: Measurement of the tensile strength of the ventral abdominal wall in comparison with scar tissue. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2007, 22(1):88-92.
• [24]Muftuoglu MA, Ozkan E, Saglam A: Effect of human pancreatic juice and bile on the tensile strength of suture materials. Am J Surg 2004, 188(2):200-203.
• [25]Kalantzi L, Goumas K, Kalioras V, Abrahamsson B, Dressman JB, Reppas C: Characterization of the human upper gastrointestinal contents under conditions simulating bioavailability/bioequivalence studies. Pharmaceut Res 2006, 23(1):165-176.
• [26]Tian F, Appert HE, Howard JM: The disintegration of absorbable suture materials on exposure to human digestive juices: an update. Am Surg 1994, 60(4):287-291.
• [27]Sugimachi K, Sufian S, Weiss MJ, Pavlides CA, Matsumoto T: Evaluation of absorbable suture materials in biliary tract surgery. Inter Surg 1978, 63(3):135-139.
• [28]Mailman ML: The efficacy of bacterial collagenase for the digestion of gingival tissue collagen. J Den Res 1979, 58(4):1424.
• [29]Maclennan JD, Mandl I, Howes EL: Bacterial digestion of collagen. J Clin Invest 1953, 32(12):1317-1322.
• [30]Chung E, McPherson N, Grant A: Tensile strength of absorbable suture materials: in vitro analysis of the effects of pH and bacteria. J Surg Edu 2009, 66(4):208-211.
• [31]Chu CC, Moncrief G: An in vitro evaluation of the stability of mechanical properties of surgical suture materials in various pH conditions. Annal Surg 1983, 198(2):223-228.
• [32]Chu CC: A comparison of the effect of pH on the biodegradation of two synthetic absorbable sutures. Annal Surg 1982, 195(1):55-59.
• [33]Chu CC: The in-vitro degradation of poly(glycolic acid) sutures–effect of pH. J Biomed Mat Res 1981, 15(6):795-804.
• [34]Lee KH, Chu CC: The role of superoxide ions in the degradation of synthetic absorbable sutures. J Biomed Mat Res 2000, 49(1):25-35.
• [35]Tomihata K, Suzuki M, Ikada Y: The pH dependence of monofilament sutures on hydrolytic degradation. J Biomed Mat Res 2001, 58(5):511-518.
• [36]Freudenberg S, Rewerk S, Kaess M, Weiss C, Dorn-Beinecke A, Post S: Biodegradation of absorbable sutures in body fluids and pH buffers. Europ Res Euro Chirurg Fors Rech Chirurg Europ 2004, 36(6):376-385.
• [37]Cam D, Hyon SH, Ikada Y: Degradation of high molecular weight poly(L-lactide) in alkaline medium. Biomaterials 1995, 16(11):833-843.