A retrospective, Italian multicenter study of complex abdominal wall defect repair with a Permacol biological mesh.
Abdominal Wall
/ physiopathology
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Animals
Biocompatible Materials
/ administration & dosage
Collagen
/ administration & dosage
Female
Hernia, Ventral
/ physiopathology
Herniorrhaphy
Humans
Italy
/ epidemiology
Male
Middle Aged
Postoperative Complications
/ physiopathology
Prostheses and Implants
Surgical Mesh
Swine
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
25 02 2020
25 02 2020
Historique:
received:
07
06
2019
accepted:
03
02
2020
entrez:
27
2
2020
pubmed:
27
2
2020
medline:
13
11
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Complex abdominal wall defects (CAWDs) can be difficult to repair and using a conventional synthetic mesh is often unsuitable. A biological mesh might offer a solution for CAWD repair, but the clinical outcomes are unclear. Here, we evaluated the efficacy of a cross-linked, acellular porcine dermal collagen matrix implant (Permacol) for CAWD repair in a cohort of 60 patients. Here, 58.3% patients presented with a grade 3 hernia (according to the Ventral Hernia Working Group grading system) and a contaminated surgical field. Permacol was implanted as a bridge in 46.7%, as an underlay (intraperitoneal position) in 38.3% and as a sublay (retromuscolar position) in 15% of patients. Fascia closure was achieved in 53.3% of patients. The surgical site occurrence rate was 35% and the defect size significantly influenced the probability of post-operative complications. The long-term (2 year) hernia recurrence rate was 36.2%. This study represents the first large multi-centre Italian case series on Permacol implants in patients with a CAWD. Our data suggest that Permacol is a feasible strategy to repair a CAWD, with acceptable early complications and long-term (2 year) recurrence rates.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32099052
doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-60019-0
pii: 10.1038/s41598-020-60019-0
pmc: PMC7042221
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biocompatible Materials
0
Permacol
0
Collagen
9007-34-5
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3367Références
Patel, N. G., Ratanshi, I. & Buchel, E. W. The Best of Abdominal Wall Reconstruction. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 141, 113–136 (2018).
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003976
Burger, J. W. A. et al. J Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia. Ann. Surg. 240, 578–583 (2004).
pubmed: 15383785
pmcid: 1356459
Chand, B. et al. A retrospective study evaluating the use of Permacol surgical implant in incisional and ventral hernia repair. Int. J. Surg. 12, 296–303 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.01.025
Slater, N. J. et al. Criteria for definition of a complex abdominal wall hernia. Hernia 18, 7–17 (2014).
doi: 10.1007/s10029-013-1168-6
Limura, E. & Giordano, P. Biological implant for complex abdominal wall reconstruction: a single institution experience and review of literature. World J. Surg. 41, 2492–2501 (2017).
doi: 10.1007/s00268-017-4066-8
Breuing, K. et al. Incisional ventral hernias: review of the literature and recommendations regarding the grading and technique of repair. Surgery 148, 544–558 (2010).
doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2010.01.008
Darehzereshki, A. et al. Biologic versus nonbiologic mesh in ventral hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J. Surg. 38, 40–50 (2014).
doi: 10.1007/s00268-013-2232-1
Harper, C. Permacol: clinical experience with a new biomaterial. Hosp. Med. 62, 90-95.
doi: 10.12968/hosp.2001.62.2.2379
Hsu, P. W. et al. Evaluation of porcine dermal collagen (Permacol) used in abdominal wall reconstruction. J. Plast. Reconstr. Aesthet. Surg. 62, 1484–1489 (2009).
doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2008.04.060
Rosen, M. J. Biologic mesh for abdominal wall reconstruction: a critical appraisal. Am. Surg. 76, 1–6 (2010).
pubmed: 20135930
Latifi, R. et al. Risk-adjusted adverse outcomes in complex abdominal wall hernia repair with biologic mesh: A case series of 140 patients. Int. J. Surg. 43, 26–32 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.05.031
Cheng, A. W., Abbas, M. A. & Tejirian, T. Outcome of abdominal wall hernia repair with Permacol biologic mesh. Am. Surg. 79, 992–996 (2013).
pubmed: 24160785
Abdelfatah, M. M., Rostambeigi, N., Podgaetz, E. & Sarr, M. G. Long-term outcomes (5-year follow-up) with porcine acellular dermal matrix (Permacol) in incisional hernias at risk for infection. Hernia 19, 135–140 (2015).
doi: 10.1007/s10029-013-1165-9
Iacco, A., Adeyemo, A., Riggs, T. & Janczyk, R. Single institutional experience using biological mesh for abdominal wall reconstruction. Am. J. Surg. 208, 480–484 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.09.020
Giordano, P. et al. The use of an acellular porcine dermal collagen implant in the repair of complex abdominal wall defects: a European multicentre retrospective study. Tech. Coloproctol. 19, 411–417
doi: 10.1007/s10151-015-1307-4
Atema, J. J. et al. Major complex abdominal wall repair in contaminated fields with use of a non cross-linked biologic mesh: a dual institutional experience. World J. Surg. 41, 1993–1999 (2017).
doi: 10.1007/s00268-017-3962-2
Harth, K. C. et al. Biologic mesh use practice patterns in abdominal wall reconstruction: a lack of consensus among surgeons. Hernia 17, 13–20 (2013).
doi: 10.1007/s10029-012-1029-8
Harris, H. W. Biologic mesh for ventral hernia repair: a cautionary tale. Ann. Surg. 257, 997–998 (2013).
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182942797
Petter-Puchner, A. H. & Dietz, U. A. Biological implants in abdominal wall repair. Br. J. Surg. 100, 987–988 (2013).
doi: 10.1002/bjs.9156
Majumder, A. et al. Comparative analysis of biologic versus synthetic mesh outcomes in contaminated hernia repairs. Surgery 160, 828–838 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2016.04.041
Kaufmann, R. et al. Repair of complex abdominal wall hernias with a cross-linked porcine acellular matrix: cross-sectional results of a Dutch cohort study. Int. J. Surg. 65, 120–127 (2019).
doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2019.03.023
Doussot, A. et al. Indications and outcomes of a cross-linked porcine dermal collagen mesh (Permacol) for complex abdominal wall reconstruction: a multicentre audit. World J. Surg. 43, 791–797 (2019).
doi: 10.1007/s00268-018-4853-x
Berger, R. L. et al. Development and validation of a risk-stratification score for surgical site occurrence and surgical site infection after open hernia repair. J. Am. Coll. Surg. 217, 974–982 (2013).
doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2013.08.003
Korenkov, M. et al. Classification and surgical treatment of incisional hernia. Results of an experts’ meeting. Langenbecks Arch. Surg. 386, 65–73 (2001).
doi: 10.1007/s004230000182
Garcia-Urena, M. A. et al. Abdominal wall reconstruction utilizing the combination of absorbable and permanent mesh in a retromuscolar position: a multicentre prospective study. World J. Surg. 43, 149–158 (2019).
doi: 10.1007/s00268-018-4765-9
Clavien, P. A. et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five years experience. Ann. Surg. 250(2009), 187–196 (2009).
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b13ca2
Atema, J. J., de Vries, F. E. & Boermeester, M. A. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the repair of potentially contaminated and contaminated abdominal wall defects. Am. J. Surg. 212, 982–995 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2016.05.003
Trippoli, S. et al. Biological meshes for abdominal hernia: Lack of evidence-based recommendations for clinical use. Int. J. Surg. 52, 278–284 (2018).
doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2018.02.046
Giordano, S., Garvey, P. B., Baumann, D. P., Liu, J. & Butler, C. E. Primary fascial closure with biologic mesh reinforcement results in lesser complication and recurrence rates than bridged biologic mesh repair for abdominal wall reconstruction: A propensity score analysis. Surgery 161, 499–508 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2016.08.009
Sarmah, B. D. & Holl-Allen, R. T. J. Porcine dermal collagen repair of incisional herniae. Br. J. Surg. 71, 524–525 (1984).
doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800710717
Parker, D. M., Armstrong, P. J., Frizzi, J. D. & North, J. H. Jr. Porcine dermal collagen (Permacol) for abdominal wall reconstruction. Curr. Surg. 63, 255–258 (2006).
doi: 10.1016/j.cursur.2006.05.003
Catena, F. et al. Use of porcine dermal collagen graft (Permacol) for hernia repair in contaminated fields. Hernia 11, 57–60 (2007).
doi: 10.1007/s10029-006-0171-6
Shaikh, F. M., Giri, S. K., Durrani, S., Waldron, D. & Grace, P. A. Experience with porcine acellular dermal collagen implant in one-stage tension-free reconstruction of acute and chronic abdominal wall defects. World J. Surg. 31, 1966–1972 (2007).
doi: 10.1007/s00268-007-9174-4
Connolly, P. T. et al. Outcome of reconstructive surgery for intestinal fistula in the open abdomen. Ann. Surg. 247, 440–444 (2008).
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181612c99
Loganathan, A., Ainslie, W. G. & Wedgwood, K. R. Initial evaluation of Permacol bioprosthesis for the repair of complex incisional and parastomal hernias. Surgeon 8, 202–205 (2010).
doi: 10.1016/j.surge.2009.11.002
Wotton, F. T. & Akoh, J. A. Rejection of Permacol mesh used in abdominal wall repair: A case report. World J. Gastroenterol. 15, 4331–4333 (2009).
doi: 10.3748/wjg.15.4331
Bellows, C. F., Smith, A., Malsbury, J. & Helton, W. S. Repair of incisional hernias with biological prosthesis: a systematic review of current evidence. Am. J. Surg. 205, 85–101 (2013).
doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2012.02.019
Köckerling, F. et al. What is the evidence for the use of biologic or biosynthetic meshes in abdominal wall reconstruction? Hernia 22, 249–269 (2018).
doi: 10.1007/s10029-018-1735-y
Tampaki, E. C., Tampakis, A., Kontzoglou, K. & Kouraklis, G. Commentary: Evidence for replacement of an infected synthetic by a biological mesh in abdominal wall hernia repair. Front. Surg. 4, 59 (2017).
doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2017.00059