BACKGROUND: Biologic mesh in the form of allograft or xenograft products have been used in complicated abdominal hernia repair, but few comparative studies exist. METHODS: A systematic review of original incisional hernia studies was conducted to include 2 primary end points: hernia recurrence and surgical site occurrence. Analysis of variance and a Satterthwaite t test compared the devices. RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies were included in this analysis, which included 1,257 patients. The total number of studies and the total subjects for each device include the following: Permacol (Tissue Science Laboratories, Hampshire, UK) (4/64), Surgisis (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN) (3/87), and Alloderm (LifeCell, Corp, Branchburg, NJ) (23/1,106). Device-specific recurrence rates and surgical site occurrence rates, respectively, were as follows: Alloderm (20.8%, 31.4%), Permacol (10.9%, 25%), and Surgisis (8.0%, 40.2%). A Satterthwaite t test comparison revealed significantly higher numbers of hernia recurrence (P = .006) and surgical site occurrence (P = .04) when comparing Alloderm with Permacol. CONCLUSIONS: Biologic mesh does play a beneficial role in abdominal wall reconstruction although allograft acellular dermal matrix does have a higher recurrence rate as compared with xenograft products, which limits its current role in hernia repair.
BACKGROUND: Biologic mesh in the form of allograft or xenograft products have been used in complicated abdominal hernia repair, but few comparative studies exist. METHODS: A systematic review of original incisional hernia studies was conducted to include 2 primary end points: hernia recurrence and surgical site occurrence. Analysis of variance and a Satterthwaite t test compared the devices. RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies were included in this analysis, which included 1,257 patients. The total number of studies and the total subjects for each device include the following: Permacol (Tissue Science Laboratories, Hampshire, UK) (4/64), Surgisis (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN) (3/87), and Alloderm (LifeCell, Corp, Branchburg, NJ) (23/1,106). Device-specific recurrence rates and surgical site occurrence rates, respectively, were as follows: Alloderm (20.8%, 31.4%), Permacol (10.9%, 25%), and Surgisis (8.0%, 40.2%). A Satterthwaite t test comparison revealed significantly higher numbers of hernia recurrence (P = .006) and surgical site occurrence (P = .04) when comparing Alloderm with Permacol. CONCLUSIONS: Biologic mesh does play a beneficial role in abdominal wall reconstruction although allograft acellular dermal matrix does have a higher recurrence rate as compared with xenograft products, which limits its current role in hernia repair.
Authors: Ali Rastegarpour; Michael Cheung; Madhurima Vardhan; Mohamed M Ibrahim; Charles E Butler; Howard Levinson Journal: Plast Surg (Oakv) Date: 2016 Impact factor: 0.947
Authors: M Boules; A T Strong; R Corcelles; I N Haskins; R Ilie; C Wathen; D Froylich; G Sharma; J Rodriguez; S Rosenblatt; K El-Hayek; M Kroh Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-09-20 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Fabio Caviggioli; Francesco Maria Klinger; Andrea Lisa; Luca Maione; Davide Forcellini; Valeriano Vinci; Luca Codolini; Marco Klinger Journal: Case Rep Med Date: 2014-03-19