Literature DB >> 34140156

Biologic mesh is non-inferior to synthetic mesh in CDC class 1 & 2 open abdominal wall reconstruction.

Jenny M Shao1, Sullivan A Ayuso2, Eva B Deerenberg3, Sharbel A Elhage2, Tanu Prasad2, Paul D Colavita2, Vedra A Augenstein2, B Todd Heniford4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Biologic mesh has historically been used in contaminated abdominal wall reconstructions (AWRs). No study has compared outcomes of biologic and synthetic in clean and clean-contaminated hernia ventral hernia repair.
METHODS: A prospective AWR database identified patients undergoing open, preperitoneal AWR with biologic mesh in CDC class 1 and 2 wounds. Using propensity score matching, a matched cohort of patients with synthetic mesh was created. The objective was to assess recurrence rates and postoperative complications.
RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients were matched in each group. Patient in the biologic group had higher rates of immunosuppression, history of transplantation, and inflammatory bowel disease (p ≤ 0.05). Operative variables were comparable for biologic vs synthetic, including defect size (230.5 ± 135.4 vs 268.7 ± 194.5 cm2, p = 0.62), but the synthetic mesh group had larger meshes placed (575.6 ± 247.0 vs 898.8 ± 246.0 cm2 p < 0.0001). Wound infections (15.5% vs 8.9%, p = 0.28) were equivalent, and recurrence rates (1.7% vs 3.4%, p = 1.00) were similar on follow up (19.3 ± 23.3 vs 23.3 ± 29.7 months, p = 0.56).
CONCLUSIONS: In matched, lower risk, complex AWR patients with large hernia defects, biologic and synthetic meshes have equal outcomes.
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Abdominal wall reconstruction; Biologic mesh; CDC wound class; Hernia; Synthetic mesh

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34140156     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2021.05.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Surg        ISSN: 0002-9610            Impact factor:   2.565


  1 in total

1.  Outcomes of biologic versus synthetic mesh in CDC class 3 and 4 open abdominal wall reconstruction.

Authors:  Michael Katzen; Sullivan A Ayuso; Jana Sacco; Dau Ku; Gregory T Scarola; Kent W Kercher; Paul D Colavita; Vedra A Augenstein; B Todd Heniford
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-08-04       Impact factor: 3.453

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.