This article presents an investigation into the mechanical properties of porcine mesocolon, small intestinal mesentery, fascia, and peritoneum tissues to generate a preliminary database of the mechanical characteristics of these tissues as surrogates for human tissue. No study has mechanically characterised porcine tissue correlates of the mesentery and associated structures. The samples were tested to determine the strength, stretch at failure, and stiffness of each tissue. The results indicated that porcine mesenteric and associated tissues visually resembled corresponding human tissues and had similar tactile characteristics, according to an expert colorectal surgeon. Stiffness values ranged from 0.088 MPa to 6.858 MPa across all tissues, with fascia being the weakest, and mesentery and peritoneum being the strongest. Failure stress values ranged from 0.336 MPa to 6.517 MPa, and failure stretch values ranged from 1.766 to 3.176, across all tissues. These mechanical data can serve as reference baseline data upon which future work can expand.
TiwariMMReynosoJFHighRet al. Safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of common laparoscopic procedures. Surg Endosc2011; 25(4): 1127–1135.
2.
XiaoDJJakimowiczJJAlbayrakAet al. Ergonomic factors on task performance in laparoscopic surgery training. Appl Ergon2012; 43(3): 548–553.
3.
CoffeyJCO’LearyDP.The mesentery: structure, function, and role in disease. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol2016; 1(3): 238–247.
4.
CoffeyJCLaveryISehgalR.Mesenteric principles of gastrointestinal surgery: basic and applied science. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2016.
5.
Sánchez-PalenciaDMD’AmoreAGonzález-ManceraAet al. Effects of fabrication on the mechanics, microstructure and micromechanical environment of small intestinal submucosa scaffolds for vascular tissue engineering. J Biomech2014; 47(11): 2766–2773.
6.
KirilovaMStoytchevSPashkoulevaDet al. Mechanical properties of human fascia transversalis. Dokladi na B lgarskata akademiâ na naukite2006; 59(7): 731–736.
7.
WattersDSmithAEastwoodMet al. Mechanical properties of the rat colon: the effect of age, sex and different conditions of storage. Q J Exp Physiol1985; 70(1): 151–162.
8.
EbensteinDMCoughlinDChapmanJet al. Nanomechanical properties of calcification, fibrous tissue, and hematoma from atherosclerotic plaques. J Biomed Mater Res A2009; 91: 1028–1037.
9.
O’LearySADoyleBJMcGloughlinTM.The impact of long term freezing on the mechanical properties of porcine aortic tissue. J Mech Behav Biomed2014; 37: 165–173.
10.
MulvihillJJWalshMT.On the mechanical behaviour of carotid artery plaques: the influence of curve-fitting experimental data on numerical model results. Biomech Model Mechanobiol2013; 12: 975–985.
11.
TimoshenkoSGoodierJ. Theory of elasticity. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company Inc., 2001.
12.
HollensteinMEhretAEItskovMet al. A novel experimental procedure based on pure shear testing of dermatome-cut samples applied to porcine skin. Biomech Model Mechanobiol2011; 10: 651–661.
13.
HolzapfelGAGasserTCOgdenRW.A new constitutive framework for arterial wall mechanics and a comparative study of material models. J Elast Phys Sci Solid2000; 61: 1–48.
14.
CunnaneEMulvihillJBarrettHet al. Mechanical, biological and structural characterization of human atherosclerotic femoral plaque tissue. Acta Biomater2015; 11: 295–303.
15.
RashidBDestradeMGilchristMD.Mechanical characterization of brain tissue in simple shear at dynamic strain rates. J Mech Behav Biomed2013; 28: 71–85.
16.
AbrahamACMoyerJTVillegasDFet al. Hyperelastic properties of human meniscal attachments. J Biomech2011; 44(3): 413–418.
17.
Caro-BretelleAIennyPLegerRet al. Constitutive modeling of stress softening and permanent set in a porcine skin tissue: impact of the storage preservation. J Biomech2016; 49(13): 2863–2869.
18.
WalshMCunnaneEMulvihillJet al. Uniaxial tensile testing approaches for characterisation of atherosclerotic plaques. J Biomech2014; 47: 793–804.
19.
HadjikovLKirilovaMStoytchevSet al. Visco-elastic mechanical behaviour of human abdominal fascia. Ser Biomech2007; 23(1): 43–51.
20.
JungeKKlingeUPrescherAet al. Elasticity of the anterior abdominal wall and impact for reparation of incisional hernias using mesh implants. Hernia2001; 5(3): 113–118.
21.
KureshiAVaiudePNazhatSet al. Mechanical properties of transversalis fascia and hernia formation. Eur Cells Mater2006; 1: 204–204.
22.
MinnsRTincklerL.Structural and mechanical aspects of prosthetic herniorrhaphy. J Biomech1976; 9(7): 435–438.
23.
KirilovaM.Visco-elastic properties of human abdominal fascia: experiments and mathematical model. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Euro summer school on biorheology & symposium on micro mechanobiology of cells, tissues and systems, Varna, 17–20 September 2006, vol. 17, issue 3, Applied Rheology, pp.62–66.
24.
CarnielEGramignaVFontanellaCet al. Characterization of the anisotropic mechanical behaviour of colonic tissues: experimental activity and constitutive formulation. Exp Physiol2014; 99(5): 759–771.
25.
SaracTPCarnevaleKSmediraNet al. In vivo and mechanical properties of peritoneum/fascia as a novel arterial substitute. J Vasc Surg2005; 41(3): 490–497.
26.
FaturechiRKarimiAHashemiSAet al. Mechanical characterization of peritoneum/fascia under uniaxial loading. J Biomater Tiss Eng2014; 4(3): 189–193.
27.
WattersDSmithAEastwoodMet al. Mechanical properties of the colon: comparison of the features of the African and European colon in vitro. Gut1985; 26(4): 384–392.
28.
YamadaHEvansFG.Strength of biological materials. Huntington, New York: 1970.
29.
WolloscheckTGaumannATerzicAet al. Inguinal hernia: measurement of the biomechanics of the lower abdominal wall and the inguinal canal. Hernia2004; 8(3): 233–241.
