ArticleMedical & biological engineering & computing2026
Comparative finite element modelling of surgical meshes at macro and mesoscale: assessing the role of morphology on mechanical behavior.
Article in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Synthetic meshes are widely used in abdominal wall surgery, yet recurrences remain common. Understanding how mesh morphology evolves under physiological loads is therefore crucial. In this work, a mesoscale finite element approach was developed and compared against the conventional macroscale approach to investigate the mechanical response of lightweight and standard weight polypropylene meshes using previously performed experimental tests. The new mesoscale approach reconstructed the porous architecture from high-resolution images, allowing anisotropy to emerge from geometry while using an isotropic hyperelastic material formulation. Macroscale models were implemented for comparison, modelling meshes as homogeneous surfaces with an anisotropic hyperelastic formulation. Material properties in both approaches were calibrated on uniaxial tensile tests and evaluated through ball burst simulations. Both strategies showed comparable agreement with experiments at the surgical mesh-level. However, mesoscale models provided insights into pore-level mechanisms, including deformation and collapse, confirmed through image-based tracking. They also confirmed that the observed anisotropy can be reproduced numerically by reconstructing the textile architecture. In conclusion, while the macroscale approach is faster to implement, mesoscale models better capture how structural features influence pore-level mechanical response. Integrating this approach into more complex simulations could help predict in vivo performance and guide the design of next-generation surgical meshes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.