nach oben

Erschienen in:

01.01.2011 | Original Article

Vagina, abdominal skin, and aponeurosis: do they have similar biomechanical properties?

verfasst von: Boris Gabriel, Chrystèle Rubod, Mathias Brieu, Bruno Dedet, Laurent de Landsheere, Vincent Delmas, Michel Cosson

Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal | Ausgabe 1/2011

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Despite minimal fundamental works, there is an increasing use of meshes in urogynecology. The concept is mainly based on experiences with abdominal wall surgery. We aimed to compare the biomechanical properties of vaginal tissue, abdominal aponeurosis, and skin.

Methods

Samples from 11 fresh women cadavers without prolapse were collected. Uniaxial tension tests were performed and stress–strain curves were obtained.

Results

Biomechanical properties of the vagina, aponeurosis, and skin differed significantly. The aponeurosis was much more rigid and less extendible than the vagina and skin. Vaginal tissue was less rigid but more extendible than skin. There was no difference between the vagina and skin at low strains (p = 0.341), but a highly significant difference at large strains (p = 0.005).

Conclusions

Skin and aponeurosis are not suited to predict vaginal tissue biomechanics. We should be cautious when transferring experiences from abdominal wall surgery to vaginal reconstructive surgery.

Luber KM, Boero S, Choe JY (2001) The demographics of pelvic floor disorders: current observations and future projections. Am J Obstet Gynecol 184:1496–1503CrossRefPubMed

Barber MD, Kuchibhatla MN, Pieper CF, Bump RC (2001) Psychometric evaluation of 2 comprehensive condition-specific quality of life instruments for women with pelvic floor disorders. Am J Obstet Gynecol 185:1388–1395CrossRefPubMed

Gabriel B, Denschlag D, Göbel H, Fittkow C, Werner M, Gitsch G et al (2005) Uterosacral ligament in postmenopausal women with or without pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 16:475–479CrossRef

Gabriel B, Watermann D, Hancke K, Gitsch G, Werner M, Tempfer C et al (2006) Increased expression of matrix metalloproteinase 2 in uterosacral ligaments is associated with pelvicorgan prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 17:478–482CrossRef

Kerkhof MH, Hendriks L, Brölmann HAM (2009) Changes in connective tissue in patients with pelvic organ prolapse—a review of the current literature. Int Urogynecol J 20:461–474CrossRef

Alperin M, Debes K, Abramowitch S, Meyn L, Moalli PA (2008) LOXL1 deficiency negatively impacts the biomechanical properties of the mouse vagina and supportive tissues. Int Urogynecol J 19:977–986CrossRef

Bauer JJ, Salky BA, Gelernt IM (1987) Repair of large abdominal wall defects with expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (PFTE). Ann Surg 206:765–769CrossRefPubMed

Pans A, Albert A, Lapière CM, Nusgens B (2001) Biochemical study of collagen in adult groin hernias. J Surg Res 95:107–113CrossRefPubMed

Afonso JS, Jorge RM, Martins PS, Soldi MD, Alves OL, Patricio B et al (2009) Structural and thermal properties of polypropylene mesh used in treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Acta Bioeng Biomech 11:27–33PubMed

10.

Rubod C, Boukerrou M, Brieu M, Dubois P, Cosson M (2007) Biomechanical properties of vaginal tissue. Part 1: new experimental protocol. J Urol 178:320–325CrossRefPubMed

11.

Mooney M (1947) A theory of large elastic deformation. J Appl Phys 1940(11):582–592

12.

Rivlin RS (1948) Large elastic deformations of isotropic materials. I. Fundamental concepts. II. Some uniqueness theorems for pure homogenous deformations. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser A: Math Phys Sci A240:459–490CrossRef

13.

Rubod C, Boukerrou M, Brieu M, Clay J-C, Dubois P, Cosson M (2008) Biomechanical properties of vaginal tissue: preliminary results. Int Urogynecol J 19:811–816CrossRef

14.

Parente MP, Jorge RM, Mascarenhas T, Fernandes AA, Martins JA (2008) Deformation of the pelvic floor muscles during a vaginal delivery. Int Urogynecol J 19:65–71CrossRef

15.

Dietz HP, Vancaillie P, Svehla M, Walsch W, Steensma AB, Vancaillie TG (2003) Mechanical properties of urogynecologic implant materials. Int Urogynecol J 14:239–243CrossRef

16.

Afonso JS, Martins PALS, Girao MJBC, Natal Jorge RM, Ferreira AJM, Mascarenhas T et al (2008) Mechanical properties of polypropylene mesh used in pelvic floor repair. Int Urogynecol J 19:375–380CrossRef

17.

Neumeyer J, Abdul-Wahab W, Beer M, Speethman J, Groneberg D, Große-Siestrup C (2007) Laboratory testing of suburethral mesh slings: a comparison of their static and dynamic properties. Int Urogynecol J 18(Suppl 1):S111

18.

Krause H, Bennet M, Forwood M, Goh J (2008) Biomechanical properties of raw meshes used in pelvic floor reconstruction. Int Urogynecol J 19:1677–1681CrossRef

19.

Cosson M, Lambaudi E, Boukerrou M, Lobry P, Crépin G, Ego A (2004) A biomechanical study of the strength of vaginal tissues. Results on 16 post-menopausal patients presenting with genital prolapse. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 112:201–205CrossRefPubMed

20.

Ettema GJ, Goh JT, Forwood MR (1998) A new method to measure elastic properties of plastic–viscoelastic connective tissue. Med Eng Phys 20:308–314CrossRefPubMed

21.

Goh JT (2002) Biomechanical properties of prolapsed vaginal tissue in pre- and postmenopausal women. Int Urogynecol J 13:76–79CrossRef

22.

Martins P, Pena E, Calvo B, Doblare M, Mascarenhas T, Jorge RN et al (2010) Prediction of nonlinear elastic behaviour of vaginal tissue: experimental results and model formulation. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng. doi:10.1080/10255840903208197

23.

Lei L, Song Y, RiQi C (2007) Biomechanical properties of prolapsed vaginal tissue in pre- and postmenopausal women. Int Urogynecol J 18:603–607CrossRef

24.

Haut RC (2002) Biomechanics of soft tissue. In: Nahum AM, Melvin JW (eds) Accidental injury. Biomechanics and prevention. Springer, New York, pp 236–238

25.

Cosson M, Debodonance P, Boukerrou M, Chauvet MP, Lobry P, Crépin G et al (2003) Mechanical properties of synthetic implants used in the repair of prolapse and urinary incontinence in women: which is the ideal material? Int Urogynecol J 14:169–178CrossRef

26.

Cosson M, Boukerrou M, Lambaudie E, Lobry P, Crépin G, Ego A (2003) Biomécanique de la réparation et résistance des tissus biologiques dans les cures de prolapsus: pourquoi utiliser des prothèses? J Gynécol Obstét Biol Reprod 32:329–337

Titel: Vagina, abdominal skin, and aponeurosis: do they have similar biomechanical properties?
verfasst von: Boris Gabriel
Chrystèle Rubod
Mathias Brieu
Bruno Dedet
Laurent de Landsheere
Vincent Delmas
Michel Cosson
Publikationsdatum: 01.01.2011
Verlag: Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal / Ausgabe 1/2011
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-010-1237-7

Update Gynäkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Vagina, abdominal skin, and aponeurosis: do they have similar biomechanical properties?