Bovine versus porcine acellular dermal matrix for abdominal wall herniorrhaphy or bridging.
Biologic mesh
Complicated ventral hernia
Hernia recurrence
Open abdomen
Ventral hernia repair
Journal
European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society
ISSN: 1863-9941
Titre abrégé: Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101313350
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2022
Jun 2022
Historique:
received:
10
02
2021
accepted:
03
03
2021
pubmed:
14
3
2021
medline:
18
6
2022
entrez:
13
3
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The management of complicated ventral hernias (CVH), namely ventral hernias in actively or recently infected/contaminated operative fields, and open abdomens in which the native fascia cannot be primarily reapproximated, pose a surgical challenge. Fetal Bovine and Porcine Acellular Dermal Matrix (BADM and PADM) biologic meshes are being increasingly used in these scenarios. A comparison, however, of clinically relevant outcomes between the two is lacking. With this investigation, we aim to review and compare clinically relevant outcomes in patients that underwent abdominal wall herniorrhaphy with either BADM or PADM at a tertiary urban academic institution over a 5-year period. Patients who had a BADM or PADM implanted during CVH over a 5-year period at a tertiary urban academic hospital were identified. Baseline clinical and hernia characteristics, as well as postoperative outcomes were compared after a retrospective chart review. Phone interviews were also conducted to assess for recurrence, followed by in-person visits as indicated. Cox Proportional Hazard regression was fitted to identify risk factors for recurrence. Of the 140 patients who underwent biologic mesh implantation for CVH, 109 were for ventral hernia repair and 31 for open abdomen bridging. Mean age was 52.7 ± 14.2 and males constituted 57.9% of our sample, while 25.1% had undergone > 5 prior abdominal operations. Thirty percent were active smokers, and another 30% required emergency surgery. Only immunosuppression was a risk factor for recurrence [HR 13.3 (1.04-169.2), p = 0.047] on Cox Proportional Hazard regression, while mesh selection had no effect. Both BADM and PADM meshes perform well in CVH, with satisfactory recurrence rates, only slightly higher compared to traditional synthetic mesh repairs.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The management of complicated ventral hernias (CVH), namely ventral hernias in actively or recently infected/contaminated operative fields, and open abdomens in which the native fascia cannot be primarily reapproximated, pose a surgical challenge. Fetal Bovine and Porcine Acellular Dermal Matrix (BADM and PADM) biologic meshes are being increasingly used in these scenarios. A comparison, however, of clinically relevant outcomes between the two is lacking. With this investigation, we aim to review and compare clinically relevant outcomes in patients that underwent abdominal wall herniorrhaphy with either BADM or PADM at a tertiary urban academic institution over a 5-year period.
METHODS
METHODS
Patients who had a BADM or PADM implanted during CVH over a 5-year period at a tertiary urban academic hospital were identified. Baseline clinical and hernia characteristics, as well as postoperative outcomes were compared after a retrospective chart review. Phone interviews were also conducted to assess for recurrence, followed by in-person visits as indicated. Cox Proportional Hazard regression was fitted to identify risk factors for recurrence.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Of the 140 patients who underwent biologic mesh implantation for CVH, 109 were for ventral hernia repair and 31 for open abdomen bridging. Mean age was 52.7 ± 14.2 and males constituted 57.9% of our sample, while 25.1% had undergone > 5 prior abdominal operations. Thirty percent were active smokers, and another 30% required emergency surgery. Only immunosuppression was a risk factor for recurrence [HR 13.3 (1.04-169.2), p = 0.047] on Cox Proportional Hazard regression, while mesh selection had no effect.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Both BADM and PADM meshes perform well in CVH, with satisfactory recurrence rates, only slightly higher compared to traditional synthetic mesh repairs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33712893
doi: 10.1007/s00068-021-01641-z
pii: 10.1007/s00068-021-01641-z
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biological Products
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1993-2001Informations de copyright
© 2021. Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Lopez-Cano M, Martin-Dominguez LA, Pereira JA, Armengol-Carrasco M, Garcia-Alamino JM. Balancing mesh-related complications and benefits in primary ventral and incisional hernia surgery. A meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. PLoS ONE. 2018;13:e0197813.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0197813
Kaufmann R, Halm JA, Eker HH, Klitsie PJ, Nieuwenhuizen J, van Geldere D, Simons MP, van der Harst E, van’t Riet M, van der Holt B, et al. Mesh versus suture repair of umbilical hernia in adults: a randomised, double-blind, controlled, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2018;391:860–9.
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30298-8
Oma E, Bisgaard T, Jorgensen LN, Jensen KK. Nationwide propensity-score matched study of mesh versus suture repair of primary ventral hernias in women with a subsequent pregnancy. World J Surg. 2019;43:1497–504.
doi: 10.1007/s00268-019-04940-0
Usher FC, Ochsner J, Tuttle LL Jr. Use of marlex mesh in the repair of incisional hernias. Am Surg. 1958;24:969–74.
pubmed: 13606360
Nguyen MT, Berger RL, Hicks SC, Davila JA, Li LT, Kao LS, Liang MK. Comparison of outcomes of synthetic mesh vs suture repair of elective primary ventral herniorrhaphy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Surg. 2014;149:415–21.
doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2013.5014
Shankar DA, Itani KM, O'Brien WJ, Sanchez VM. Factors Associated With Long-term Outcomes of Umbilical Hernia Repair. JAMA Surg 2017.
Collaboration EUHT. Repair of groin hernia with synthetic mesh: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ann Surg. 2002;235:322–32.
doi: 10.1097/00000658-200203000-00003
Mathes T, Walgenbach M, Siegel R. Suture versus mesh repair in primary and incisional ventral hernias: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg. 2016;40:826–35.
doi: 10.1007/s00268-015-3311-2
Ventral Hernia Working G, Breuing K, Butler CE, Ferzoco S, Franz M, Hultman CS, Kilbridge JF, Rosen M, Silverman RP, Vargo D. Incisional ventral hernias: review of the literature and recommendations regarding the grading and technique of repair. Surgery. 2010;148:544–58.
doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2010.01.008
Clemens MW, Selber JC, Liu J, Adelman DM, Baumann DP, Garvey PB, Butler CE. Bovine versus porcine acellular dermal matrix for complex abdominal wall reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;131:71–9.
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182729e58
Janfaza M, Martin M, Skinner R. A preliminary comparison study of two noncrosslinked biologic meshes used in complex ventral hernia repairs. World J Surg. 2012;36:1760–4.
doi: 10.1007/s00268-012-1576-2
Butler CE, Campbell KT. Minimally invasive component separation with inlay bioprosthetic mesh (MICSIB) for complex abdominal wall reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128:698–709.
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e318221dcce
Espinosa-de-los-Monteros A, de la Torre JI, Marrero I, Andrades P, Davis MR, Vasconez LO. Utilization of human cadaveric acellular dermis for abdominal hernia reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2007;58:264–7.
doi: 10.1097/01.sap.0000254410.91132.a8
Butler CE, Langstein HN, Kronowitz SJ. Pelvic, abdominal, and chest wall reconstruction with AlloDerm in patients at increased risk for mesh-related complications. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005;116:1263–75.
doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000181692.71901.bd
Jin J, Rosen MJ, Blatnik J, McGee MF, Williams CP, Marks J, Ponsky J. Use of acellular dermal matrix for complicated ventral hernia repair: does technique affect outcomes? J Am Coll Surg. 2007;205:654–60.
doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2007.06.012
Burns NK, Jaffari MV, Rios CN, Mathur AB, Butler CE. Non-cross-linked porcine acellular dermal matrices for abdominal wall reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125:167–76.
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181c2a6ed
Sabbagh C, Dumont F, Robert B, Badaoui R, Verhaeghe P, Regimbeau JM. Peritoneal volume is predictive of tension-free fascia closure of large incisional hernias with loss of domain: a prospective study. Hernia. 2011;15:559–65.
doi: 10.1007/s10029-011-0832-y
Warren J, Desai SS, Boswell ND, Hancock BH, Abbad H, Ewing JA, Carbonell AM, Cobb WS. Safety and efficacy of synthetic mesh for ventral hernia repair in a contaminated field. J Am Coll Surg. 2020;230:405–13.
doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2019.12.008
de Vries FEE, Hodgkinson JD, Claessen JJM, van Ruler O, Leo CA, Maeda Y, Lapid O, Obdeijn MC, Tanis PJ, Bemelman WA, et al. Long-term outcomes after contaminated complex abdominal wall reconstruction. Hernia 2020.
Jakob MO, Spari D, Zindel J, Pinworasarn T, Candinas D, Beldi G. Prophylactic, synthetic intraperitoneal mesh versus no mesh implantation in patients with fascial dehiscence. J Gastrointest Surg. 2018;22:2158–66.
doi: 10.1007/s11605-018-3873-z
Booth JH, Garvey PB, Baumann DP, Selber JC, Nguyen AT, Clemens MW, Liu J, Butler CE. Primary fascial closure with mesh reinforcement is superior to bridged mesh repair for abdominal wall reconstruction. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;217:999–1009.
doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2013.08.015
Garvey PB, Martinez RA, Baumann DP, Liu J, Butler CE. Outcomes of abdominal wall reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix are not affected by wound contamination. J Am Coll Surg. 2014;219:853–64.
doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.06.021
Giordano SA, Garvey PB, Baumann DP, Liu J, Butler CE. Hospital readmission following open, single-stage, elective abdominal wall reconstructions using acellular dermal matrix affects long-term hernia recurrence rate. Am J Surg. 2018;216:60–6.
doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2018.01.072