No evidence of Permacol rejection presented by Wotton and Akoh.

Wotton and Akoh in their previously reported case in this journal postulate that Permacol rejected. This letter provides a detailed critique of that claim and provides an alternative explanation for the histological data provided by the authors. It is also argued that Wotton and Akoh have misrepresented one of the papers in the discussion in their article and a clarification of that referenced paper is given.