A comparison of woven versus nonwoven polypropylene (PP) and expanded versus condensed polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) on their intraperitoneal incorporation and adhesion formation.

OBJECTIVE: To compare known and novel synthetic materials useful for incisional hernia repair and to test independently, whether they justify common perceptions related to their use.

METHODS: Four types of synthetic materials were implanted in to 12 pigs to compare incorporation histology and adhesion formation 90 d after placement. Woven polypropylene (WPP), nonwoven polypropylene (NWPP), expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE). and condensed polytetrafluoroethylene (cPTFE) were placed intraperitoneally (IP).

RESULTS: Intraperitoneally, WPP became fully peritonealized, but generated thick and plentiful adhesions. NWPP became fully peritonealized and generated filmy and far less numerous adhesions. ePTFE formed some filmy adhesions and did not peritonealize. cPTFE and WPP became fully peritonealized. However, bowel became adherent on raised edges of cPTFE and WPP.

CONCLUSION: We conclude that NWPP incorporates extremely well intraperitoneally, promotes few adhesions, and its use is likely to be suitable for hernia repair. cPTFE performs well and promotes few adhesions, but to minimize potentially serious complications, its edges must be secured around its entire circumference.