The comparison of adhesion formation effects of Hi-TEX®PARP NT and Proceed Mesh

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authorscopusid35622921200
dc.authorscopusid8635784900
dc.authorscopusid14015084500
dc.authorscopusid16303722500
dc.authorscopusid35621633100
dc.contributor.authorYalçin, Ercan
dc.contributor.authorHasdemir, Oguz
dc.contributor.authorBüyükaşik, Oktay
dc.contributor.authorDinler, Kahraman
dc.contributor.authorCavit, Ç.Ö.L.
dc.date.accessioned2024-09-25T19:43:17Z
dc.date.available2024-09-25T19:43:17Z
dc.date.issued2008
dc.departmentAbant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractPurpose: Aim of this experimental study is to compare the adhesion formation effects of two different prosthetic materials (HI-TEX ®Parp NT mesh and Proceed mesh) in hernia repair. Material and Methods: Twenty Wistar-Albino rats were used for the study. Defects of 2×1 cm size were created at the right and left of each rat's anterior abdominal wall. Proceed mesh is implanted on the right side and HI-TEX mesh on the left side at half of them (Group A), and Proceed mesh is implanted on the left side and HI-TEX mesh on the right side at the other half (Group B) to repair the defect. Two rats of each group is sacrificed at the 7th, 14th, 21 st, 28th and 35th days postoperatively and extension and severity of the adhesion and tissue reaction to the implants are evaluated. Results: At the end of the study, no difference was found between two groups concerning extension and severity of the adhesion. Adhesion were more frequent in the rats sacrificed on the 7th and 14th days. Proceed mesh adhesion extension (U=376, p<0.05) and severity (U=352, p<0.05)) were significantly less than HI-TEX mesh. Tissue reactions to implants were more with HI-TEX mesh, however, no difference was found statistically significant (×2«0.41, p>0.05). Conclusion: We have the opinion that Proceed mesh is superior to HI-TEX mesh in hernia repair as it has less adhesion formation effect. Asa result, Proceed mesh is thought to be a more suitable hernia repairment material compared to HI-TEX mesh.en_US
dc.identifier.endpage136en_US
dc.identifier.issn1300-0705
dc.identifier.issue3en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-77649097742en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ3en_US
dc.identifier.startpage131en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12491/12515
dc.identifier.volume24en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.language.isotren_US
dc.publisherTurkish Surgical Societyen_US
dc.relation.ispartofTurkish Journal of Surgeryen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.snmzYK_20240925en_US
dc.subjectAdhesionen_US
dc.subjectHerniaen_US
dc.subjectMeshen_US
dc.titleThe comparison of adhesion formation effects of Hi-TEX®PARP NT and Proceed Meshen_US
dc.title.alternativeHİ-tex®parp NT yama ile Proceed Yama'nin adezyon yapici özelliklerinin karşilaştirilmasi]en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu