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

Am J Surg. 2022 Feb;223(2):375-379. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2021.05.019. Epub 2021 Jun 10.

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.

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

MeSH terms

  • Abdominal Wall* / surgery
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S.
  • Hernia, Ventral* / etiology
  • Hernia, Ventral* / surgery
  • Herniorrhaphy / adverse effects
  • Humans
  • Prospective Studies
  • Recurrence
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Surgical Mesh
  • Treatment Outcome
  • United States