In vivo response to polypropylene following implantation in animal models: a review of biocompatibility

68Citations
Citations of this article
223Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis: Polypropylene is a material that is commonly used to treat pelvic floor conditions such as pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Owing to the nature of complications experienced by some patients implanted with either incontinence or prolapse meshes, the biocompatibility of polypropylene has recently been questioned. This literature review considers the in vivo response to polypropylene following implantation in animal models. The specific areas explored in this review are material selection, impact of anatomical location, and the structure, weight and size of polypropylene mesh types. Methods: All relevant abstracts from original articles investigating the host response of mesh in vivo were reviewed. Papers were obtained and categorised into various mesh material types: polypropylene, polypropylene composites, and other synthetic and biologically derived mesh. Results: Polypropylene mesh fared well in comparison with other material types in terms of host response. It was found that a lightweight, large-pore mesh is the most appropriate structure. Conclusion: The evidence reviewed shows that polypropylene evokes a less inflammatory or similar host response when compared with other materials used in mesh devices.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kelly, M., Macdougall, K., Olabisi, O., & McGuire, N. (2017). In vivo response to polypropylene following implantation in animal models: a review of biocompatibility. International Urogynecology Journal, 28(2), 171–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-016-3029-1

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free