Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In vivo evaluation shows bioactive coated mesh significantly improves tissue integration in hernia models, suggesting promising clinical outcomes.
Background: Surgical meshes used in hernia repair face long-term challenges, particularly postoperative complications such as chronic inflammation and poor tissue integration leading to much more complications such as hernia recurrence. Objective: This study proposes a mesh with dual-function bioactive coating which is a mesh that modulated in a way to suppress acute immune response to improve healing outcomes and reduce recurrence rates. Methods: The mesh designed to have two functional layers. The first layer uses leverages poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) as a degradable carrier for dexamethasone, providing early-stage inflammation control followed by a layer of chitosan-hyaluronic acid hydrogel that releasing vascular endothelial growth factor and transforming growth factor-beta 3 to guide constructive remodelling. In addition, surface nano-structuring via layer-by-layer assembly enhances mechanical stability and cellular interactions. Results: In vivo evaluations in a rat ventral hernia model were used to evaluate long-term mesh showing a significant improvement in tissue integration; the coated meshes demonstrated a 67% reduction in fibrotic capsule thickness and also it lowered the level of inflammatory-induced cytokines. In addition, the trial shows the availability of coating mesh to polarise macrophages toward the regenerative M2 phenotype, which is a key predictor of reduced fibrosis. In vivo studies give the coated mesh an advantage in enhancing vascularisation and collagen deposition compared to uncoated controls. Conclusion: This study addresses the critical limitations of conventional meshes. The proposed strategy offers a clinically translatable solution to improve surgical outcomes, particularly in hernia repair, where mesh rejection and fibrosis remain major challenges.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alharbi et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: