Abstract
Xenografts, bovine or porcine acellular collagen bioprostheses derived from dermis, pericardium, or small-intestine submucosa, were introduced to overcome synthetic mesh-related complications. Although there are eight commercially available xenografts, there is a paucity of empiric information to justify their use instead of the use of synthetic grafts. In addition, limited data are available about which graft characteristics are important and whether graft-reinforced repairs reduce recurrences and improve outcomes. To address these knowledge gaps, we conducted a Medline search of published reports on xenografts in animal and human trials. Histologic host response to implanted xenograft material depends primarily on chemical cross-linking and porosity, and it is limited to four responses: resorption, incorporation, encapsulation, and mixed. No clinical data unequivocally demonstrate an improved benefit to graft-reinforced repair.
Similar content being viewed by others
Abbreviations
- ePTFE:
-
expanded polytetrafluoroethylene
- SIS:
-
small-intestine submucosa
References
Samuelsson EC, Arne Victor FT, Tibblin G, Svardsudd KF (1999) Signs of genital prolapse in a Swedish population of women 20 to 59 years of age and possible related factors. Am J Obstet Gynecol 180:299–305
Nygaard I, Bradley C, Brandt D, Women’s Health Initiative (2004) Pelvic organ prolapse in older women: prevalence and risk factors. Obstet Gynecol 104:489–497
Helstrom L, Nilsson B (2005) Impact of vaginal surgery on sexuality and quality of life in women with urinary incontinence or genital descensus. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 84:79–84
Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL (1997) Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 89:501–506
Subak LL, Waetjen LE, van den Eeden S, Thom DH, Vittinghoff E, Brown JS (2001) Cost of pelvic organ prolapse surgery in the United States. Obstet Gynecol 98:646–651
Amid PK (1997) Classification of biomaterials and their related complications in abdominal wall hernia surgery. Hernia 1:15–21
Bemelmans BL, Chapple CR (2003) Are slings now the gold standard treatment for the management of female urinary stress incontinence and if so which technique? Curr Opin Urol 13:301–307
Burger JW, Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, Halm JA, Verdaasdonk EG, Jeekel J (2004) Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia. Ann Surg 240:578–583
Birch C, Fynes MM (2002) The role of synthetic and biological prostheses in reconstructive pelvic floor surgery. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 14:527–535
Sand PK, Koduri S, Lobel RW, Winkler HA, Tomezsko J, Culligan PJ et al (2001) Prospective randomized trial of polyglactin 910 mesh to prevent recurrence of cystoceles and rectoceles. Am J Obstet Gynecol 184:1357–1362
Weber AM, Walters MD, Piedmonte MR, Ballard LA (2001) Anterior colporrhaphy: a randomized trial of three surgical techniques. Am J Obstet Gynecol 185:1299–1304
Cervigni M, Natale F (2001) The use of synthetics in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Curr Opin Urol 11:429–435
Iglesia CB, Fenner DE, Brubaker L (1997) The use of mesh in gynecologic surgery. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 8:105–115
Bellon JM, Contreras LA, Bujan J, Palomares D, Carrera-San Martin A (1998) Tissue response to polypropylene meshes used in the repair of abdominal wall defects. Biomaterials 19:669–675
Bobyn JD, Wilson GJ, MacGregor DC, Pilliar RM, Weatherly GC (1982) Effect of pore size on the peel strength of attachment of fibrous tissue to porous-surfaced implants. J Biomed Mater Res 16:571–584
Bafghi A, Benizri EI, Trastour C, Benizri EJ, Michiels JF, Bongain A (2005) Multifilament polypropylene mesh for urinary incontinence: 10 cases of infections requiring removal of the sling. BJOG 112:376–378
Baessler K, Hewson AD, Tunn R, Schuessler B, Maher CF (2005) Severe mesh complications following intravaginal slingplasty. Obstet Gynecol 106:713–716
Badylak S, Kokini K, Tullius B, Simmons-Byrd A, Morff R (2002) Morphologic study of small intestinal submucosa as a body wall repair device. J Surg Res 103:190–202
Gandhi S, Kubba LM, Abramov Y, Botros SM, Goldberg RP, Victor TA et al (2005) Histopathologic changes of porcine dermis xenografts for transvaginal suburethral slings. Am J Obstet Gynecol 192:1643–1648
Badylak S, Kokini K, Tullius B, Whitson B (2001) Strength over time of a resorbable bioscaffold for body wall repair in a dog model. J Surg Res 99:282–287
Record RD, Hillegonds D, Simmons C, Tullius R, Rickey FA, Elmore D et al (2001) In vivo degradation of 14C-labeled small intestinal submucosa (SIS) when used for urinary bladder repair. Biomaterials 22:2653–2659
Voytik-Harbin SL, Brightman AO, Kraine MR, Waisner B, Badylak SF (1997) Identification of extractable growth factors from small intestinal submucosa. J Cell Biochem 67:478–491
Clarke KM, Lantz GC, Salisbury SK, Badylak SF, Hiles MC, Voytik SL (1996) Intestine submucosa and polypropylene mesh for abdominal wall repair in dogs. J Surg Res 60:107–114
Wiedemann A, Otto M (2004) Small intestinal submucosa for pubourethral sling suspension for the treatment of stress incontinence: first histopathological results in humans. J Urol 172:215–218
Zheng F, Verbeken E, de Ridder D, Deprest J (2005) Improved surgical outcome by modification of porcine dermal collagen implant in abdominal wall reconstruction in rats. Neurourol Urodyn 24:362–368
Zheng F, Lin Y, Verbeken E, Claerhout F, Fastrez M, De Ridder D et al (2004) Host response after reconstruction of abdominal wall defects with porcine dermal collagen in a rat model. Am J Obstet Gynecol 191:1961–1970
Konstantinovic ML, Lagae P, Zheng F, Verbeken EK, De Ridder D, Deprest JA (2005) Comparison of host response to polypropylene and non-cross-linked porcine small intestine serosal-derived collagen implants in a rat model. BJOG 112:1554–1560
Ansaloni L, Catena F, D’Alessandro L (2003) Prospective randomized, double-blind, controlled trial comparing Lichtenstein’s repair of inguinal hernia with polypropylene mesh versus Surgisis gold soft tissue graft: preliminary results. Acta Biomed Ateneo Parm 74(Suppl 2):10–14
Cole E, Gomelsky A, Dmochowski RR (2003) Encapsulation of a porcine dermis pubovaginal sling. J Urol 170:1950
Altman D, Zetterstrom J, Lopez A, Anzen B, Falconer C, Hjern F et al (2005) Functional and anatomic outcome after transvaginal rectocele repair using collagen mesh: a prospective study. Dis Colon Rectum 48:1233–1241
Bellon JM, Rodriguez M, Serrano N, San-Martin AC, Bujan J (2004) Improved biomechanical resistance using an expanded polytetrafluoroethylene composite-structure prosthesis. World J Surg 28:461–465 (May, epub 2004 Apr 19)
Gomelsky A, Rudy DC, Dmochowski RR (2004) Porcine dermis interposition graft for repair of high grade anterior compartment defects with or without concomitant pelvic organ prolapse procedures. J Urol 171:1581–1584
Leboeuf L, Miles RA, Kim SS, Gousse AE (2004) Grade 4 cystocele repair using four-defect repair and porcine xenograft acellular matrix (Pelvicol): outcome measures using SEAPI. Urology 64:282–286
Salomon LJ, Detchev R, Barranger E, Cortez A, Callard P, Darai E (2004) Treatment of anterior vaginal wall prolapse with porcine skin collagen implant by the transobturator route: preliminary results. Eur Urol 45:219–225
Verleyen P, Filip C, Bart K, Frank VDA, Jan D, Dirk DR. A prospective randomised trial comparing Pelvicol® and Vicryl® for cystocoele repair in the raz-colposuspension [abstract 613]. Available from: http://www.urotoday.com/264/conference_reports/ics_2004/ics2004_conferences_bard_sponsored.html
Meschia M, Pifarotti P, Gattei U, Magatii F, Kojancic E, Riva D et al. Multicentre randomized trial of Pelvicol® implant to prevent recurrence of anterior vaginal wall prolapse in women undergoing primary surgery for genital prolapse [abstract 289]. Available from: http://www.continet.org/publications/2004/pdf/0289.pdf
Dell JR, O’Kelley KR (2005) PelviSoft BioMesh augmentation of rectocele repair: the initial clinical experience in 35 patients. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 16:44–47 (Jan–Feb, epub 2004 Sep 1)
Sung VW, Sokol ER, Rardin CR, Clemons JL, Meyers DL. Porcine-derived small intestinal submucosa graft-augmented rectocele repair [abstract]. Available from: http://www.augs.org/files/public/2004_Non-Oral_Poster_Presentations.pdf
Derwin K, Androjna C, Spencer E, Safran O, Bauer TW, Hunt T et al (2004) Porcine small intestine submucosa as a flexor tendon graft. Clin Orthop Relat Res 423:245–252
Mantovani F, Trinchieri A, Castelnuovo C, Romano AL, Pisani E (2003) Reconstructive urethroplasty using porcine acellular matrix. Eur Urol 44:600–602
O’Connor RC, Hollowell CM, Steinberg GD (2002) Distal ureteral replacement with tubularized porcine small intestine submucosa. Urology 60:697
Acknowledgment
Editing, proofreading, and reference verification were provided by the Section of Scientific Publications, Mayo Clinic.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Trabuco, E.C., Klingele, C.J. & Gebhart, J.B. Xenograft use in reconstructive pelvic surgery: a review of the literature. Int Urogynecol J 18, 555–563 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-006-0288-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-006-0288-2