Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 13, 2026
A Unique Mouse Model for Quantitative Assessment of Biofilm Formation on Surgical Implants in Subcutaneous Abscess
Published on: June 6, 2025
Infection potentiation study of synthetic and naturally derived surgical mesh in mice
Shubhangi Bhende1, Thomas Barbolt, Stephen Rothenburger
1ETHICON (Johnson & Johnson), Somerville, New Jersey 08876, USA. sbhende@ethus.jnj.com
Purpose:
To evaluate the potential of synthetic surgical meshes (Marlex((R)) mesh [C.R. Bard, Inc., Murray Hill, NJ]; MYCROMESH PLUS [W.L. Gore and Associates, Inc., Flagstaff, AZ]; GYNECARE GYNEMESH Nonabsorbable PROLENE* Soft Mesh [Ethicon, Somerville, NJ]; and naturally derived surgical mesh materials (DermMatrix) [Carbon Medical Technologies, St. Paul, MN] and SURGISIS [Cook Surgical, Spencer, IN]) to serve as a nidus for microbial attachment and growth, thus exacerbating surgical site infection.
Methods:
Meshes were implanted subcutaneously in mice and inoculated with 10(4) colony-forming units (cfu) of Staphylococcus aureus. Mice were euthanized four days later, and the implants were removed, homogenized, and cultured using a standard agar pour plate method to determine the number of viable bacteria that could be recovered from each implant.
Results:
The Marlex mesh and Gynecare Gynemesh PS were comparable and "neutral" to infection, the average number of bacteria recovered being 1.61 x 10(5) and 5.41 x 10(4) cfu, respectively. Mycromesh Plus, with its antibacterial coating, resulted in a reduction in the number of bacteria recovered, the average being 1.61 x 10(1) cfu. Naturally derived meshes were considered to potentiate infection on the basis of macroscopic observation of infection and significantly increased numbers of bacteria recovered from the implant: 1.84 x 10(8) cfu from DermMatrix and 3.17 x 10(7) cfu from Surgisis.
Conclusion:
The synthetic meshes did not potentiate infection in this model, whereas the naturally-derived materials did. As this preclinical model was able to detect differences between different implant materials, it may have utility in assessing the infection potentiation properties of newly developed materials.
Insights
Synthetic surgical meshes did not increase infection risk in mice, unlike naturally derived meshes which potentiated bacterial growth. This preclinical model can assess new materials for infection potential.
Area of Science:
- Biomaterials Science
- Infectious Disease Research
- Surgical Innovation
Background:
- Surgical site infections (SSIs) are a significant complication.
- Surgical meshes are commonly used in procedures but can act as a nidus for bacterial growth.
- Understanding how different mesh materials influence infection is crucial for patient safety.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the infection-potentiating potential of various synthetic and naturally derived surgical meshes.
- To determine if surgical mesh type influences microbial attachment and growth, exacerbating SSIs.
- To assess a preclinical model's utility in differentiating infection properties of implant materials.
Main Methods:
- Synthetic (Marlex, MYCROMESH PLUS, GYNECARE GYNEMESH) and naturally derived (DermMatrix, SURGISIS) meshes were implanted subcutaneously in mice.
- Implants were inoculated with Staphylococcus aureus (10^4 colony-forming units).
- Bacterial recovery from explanted meshes after four days quantified infection potential.
Main Results:
- Synthetic meshes Marlex and Gynecare Gynemesh showed neutral infection profiles (1.61x10^5 and 5.41x10^4 CFU).
- MYCROMESH PLUS, with an antibacterial coating, significantly reduced bacteria (1.61x10^1 CFU).
- Naturally derived meshes DermMatrix and Surgisis potentiated infection (1.84x10^8 and 3.17x10^7 CFU).
Conclusions:
- Synthetic surgical meshes did not potentiate infection in this preclinical model.
- Naturally derived materials significantly increased bacterial load, suggesting they potentiate infection.
- This model effectively differentiates the infection-potentiation properties of surgical implant materials.
