Yohann Renard1, Louis de Mestier2, Julie Henriques3, Paul de Boissieu4, Philippe de Mestier5, Abe Fingerhut6, Jean-Pierre Palot7, Reza Kianmanesh7. 1. Department of General, Digestive and Endocrine Surgery, Robert-Debré University Hospital, University of Reims Champagne-Ardenne, Reims, France. yrenard@chu-reims.fr. 2. Department of Gastroenterology and Pancreatology, Paris 7 University, Beaujon Hospital (APHP), Clichy, France. 3. Department of Methodology and Quality of Life (INSERM UMR 1098), Besançon University Hospital, Besançon, France. 4. Epidemiology and Public Health Department, Kremlin-Bicêtre University Hospital, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France. 5. Department of General Surgery, Clinique Saint Jean de Dieu, Paris, France. 6. Unit of Surgical Research, Department of Surgery, University Hospital of Graz, Graz, Austria. 7. Department of General, Digestive and Endocrine Surgery, Robert-Debré University Hospital, University of Reims Champagne-Ardenne, Reims, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The use of absorbable meshes during contaminated or infected incisional hernia (IH) repair is associated with high morbidity and recurrence rates. Biological meshes might be more appropriate but have been described in highly heterogeneous series. This study aimed at comparing the efficacy of absorbable vs. biological meshes for the treatment of contaminated or infected IH in a homogeneous series with a standardized technique. METHODS: Data of all patients operated on between 2008 and 2015 for contaminated or infected IH, using an absorbable (A) Vicryl® or a biological (B) Strattice® mesh, were reviewed. Patient characteristics, infectious complication rates, and recurrence-free outcome (RFO) were compared between the two groups. A propensity score methodology was applied to a Cox regression model to deal with unbalanced characteristics between groups. RESULTS: Patient demographics in A (n = 57) and in B (n = 24) were similar except that B patients had larger parietal defects (p < 0.001) and higher Center for Disease Control (CDC) wound class (p = 0.034). Patients in A had statistically significantly more postoperative early (61.4% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.03) and late (31.2% vs. 8.3%, p = 0.046) infectious complications. Six-, 12-, and 36-month RFO rates were 77%, 47%, and 24%, and 96%, 87%, and 82% in A and B, respectively, p < 0.001. Raw multivariable Cox regression analysis found that B (HR = 0.1, 95% CI [0.03-0.34], p < 0.001) was independently associated with prolonged RFO (HR = 0.091, 95% CI [0.045-0.180], p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Biological meshes seem to be superior to absorbable meshes in patients with contaminated or infected incisional hernia. These results need to be confirmed by prospective randomized trials.
BACKGROUND: The use of absorbable meshes during contaminated or infected incisional hernia (IH) repair is associated with high morbidity and recurrence rates. Biological meshes might be more appropriate but have been described in highly heterogeneous series. This study aimed at comparing the efficacy of absorbable vs. biological meshes for the treatment of contaminated or infected IH in a homogeneous series with a standardized technique. METHODS: Data of all patients operated on between 2008 and 2015 for contaminated or infected IH, using an absorbable (A) Vicryl® or a biological (B) Strattice® mesh, were reviewed. Patient characteristics, infectious complication rates, and recurrence-free outcome (RFO) were compared between the two groups. A propensity score methodology was applied to a Cox regression model to deal with unbalanced characteristics between groups. RESULTS:Patient demographics in A (n = 57) and in B (n = 24) were similar except that B patients had larger parietal defects (p < 0.001) and higher Center for Disease Control (CDC) wound class (p = 0.034). Patients in A had statistically significantly more postoperative early (61.4% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.03) and late (31.2% vs. 8.3%, p = 0.046) infectious complications. Six-, 12-, and 36-month RFO rates were 77%, 47%, and 24%, and 96%, 87%, and 82% in A and B, respectively, p < 0.001. Raw multivariable Cox regression analysis found that B (HR = 0.1, 95% CI [0.03-0.34], p < 0.001) was independently associated with prolonged RFO (HR = 0.091, 95% CI [0.045-0.180], p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Biological meshes seem to be superior to absorbable meshes in patients with contaminated or infected incisional hernia. These results need to be confirmed by prospective randomized trials.
Authors: Jacqueline J Choi; Nandini C Palaniappa; Kai B Dallas; Tamara B Rudich; Modesto J Colon; Celia M Divino Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Michael J Rosen; Joel J Bauer; Marco Harmaty; Alfredo M Carbonell; William S Cobb; Brent Matthews; Matthew I Goldblatt; Don J Selzer; Benjamin K Poulose; Bibi M E Hansson; Camiel Rosman; James J Chao; Garth R Jacobsen Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: S Morales-Conde; P Hernández-Granados; L Tallón-Aguilar; M Verdaguer-Tremolosa; M López-Cano Journal: Hernia Date: 2022-09-13 Impact factor: 2.920
Authors: Andrew S Miller; Kathryn Boyce; Benjamin Box; Matthew D Clarke; Sarah E Duff; Niamh M Foley; Richard J Guy; Lisa H Massey; George Ramsay; Dominic A J Slade; James A Stephenson; Phil J Tozer; Danette Wright Journal: Colorectal Dis Date: 2021-02 Impact factor: 3.917
Authors: D Harji; C Thomas; S A Antoniou; H Chandraratan; B Griffiths; B T Henniford; L Horgan; F Köckerling; M López-Cano; L Massey; M Miserez; A Montgomery; F Muysoms; B K Poulose; W Reinpold; N Smart Journal: BJS Open Date: 2021-03-05