Русский
Experimental foundation of the use of prolene implant while performing kidney resection
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/urology.2021.6.35-39
V.B. Filimonov, M.V. Mnihovich, R.V. Vasin, S.A. Ivanov, A.V. Petryaev, I.S. Sobennikov
1) Ryazan state medical university named after acad. I.P. Pavlov, Ryazan, Russia; 2) Ryazan ambulance hospital, Ryazan, Russia; 3) Moscow Research Institute of Human Morphology, Moscow, Russia; 4) Ryazan City Clinical Hospital №11, Ryazan, Russia; 5) Medical Radiological Scientific Center named after A.F. Tsyba – branch of «National Medical Research Center for Radiology» of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Obninsk, Russia; 6) Tula regional clinical hospital, Tula, Russia
Aim. To study the method of performing a kidney resection using a prolene mesh implant of medium rigidity and to substantiate the possibility of further application of this method of kidney resection in clinical practice in an experiment.
Materials and research methods. The study is experimental. The study was carried out using pig models. In total 50 laboratory animals were included in the study. The operation of kidney resection was simulated using laboratory animals. In 25 cases, the kidney resection was performed according to the classical method, in other 25 cases, the kidney resection was performed according to the author’s method of kidney resection using a prolene mesh implant. We studied the average time of surgery, the average weight of the postoperative scar, the pathological presentation of the area of kidney resection at various term after the operation.
Results. The average operation time was on average 3.1 minutes (5.7%) longer in the group of laboratory animals operated on with the use of a prolene mesh implant. The average weight of the postoperative scar zone is 1.7 grams (27%) higher in the group of laboratory animals operated on according to the classical hemostasis method of the renal resection area. Interpretation of the results of a histopathological study of the kidney resection area indicates the development of a taft connective tissue structure around the prolene implant of the «patch» type in the shape of strands of dense granulation tissue surrounded by foreign body granulomas.
Conclusion. The use of a prolene implant when performing a kidney resection is a reliable method of hemostasis of the postoperative defect area, that gives a possibility to minimize cicatricial changes in the renal parenchyma without significant prolongation of the operation time.
Materials and research methods. The study is experimental. The study was carried out using pig models. In total 50 laboratory animals were included in the study. The operation of kidney resection was simulated using laboratory animals. In 25 cases, the kidney resection was performed according to the classical method, in other 25 cases, the kidney resection was performed according to the author’s method of kidney resection using a prolene mesh implant. We studied the average time of surgery, the average weight of the postoperative scar, the pathological presentation of the area of kidney resection at various term after the operation.
Results. The average operation time was on average 3.1 minutes (5.7%) longer in the group of laboratory animals operated on with the use of a prolene mesh implant. The average weight of the postoperative scar zone is 1.7 grams (27%) higher in the group of laboratory animals operated on according to the classical hemostasis method of the renal resection area. Interpretation of the results of a histopathological study of the kidney resection area indicates the development of a taft connective tissue structure around the prolene implant of the «patch» type in the shape of strands of dense granulation tissue surrounded by foreign body granulomas.
Conclusion. The use of a prolene implant when performing a kidney resection is a reliable method of hemostasis of the postoperative defect area, that gives a possibility to minimize cicatricial changes in the renal parenchyma without significant prolongation of the operation time.
About the Autors
Corresponding author: I. S. Sobennikov Ph.D. – assistant of department of urology with a course of surgical diseases Ryazan state medical university named after acad. I.P. Pavlov, Ryazan, Russia; e-mail: isobennikov@list.ru
Similar Articles
