Advertisement

Hernia

, Volume 11, Issue 1, pp 57–60 | Cite as

Use of porcine dermal collagen graft (Permacol) for hernia repair in contaminated fields

  • F. Catena
  • L. Ansaloni
  • F. Gazzotti
  • S. Gagliardi
  • S. Di Saverio
  • L. D’Alessandro
  • A. D. Pinna
Original Article

Abstract

Background

Complicated hernias often involve contaminating surgical procedures in which the use of polypropylene meshes can be hazardous. Prostheses made of porcine dermal collagen (PDC) have recently been proposed as a means to offset the disadvantages of polypropylene meshes and have since been used in humans for hernia repairs. The aim of our study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of incisional hernia repair using PDC as a mesh in complicated cases involving contamination.

Methods

A prospective study of hernia repair of complicated incisional hernias with contamination using PDC grafts was carried out at the Department of General, Emergency and Transplant Surgery of St Orsola-Malpighi University Hospital.

Results

From January 2004 up to the writing of this article, seven patients were treated for complicated incisional hernias with a PDC prosthesis. In six out of seven patients a bowel resection was carried out. There were not surgical complications. Morbidity was 14.2%. No recurrences and wound infections were observed.

Conclusions

Incisional hernioplasty using PDC grafts is a potentially safe and efficient approach in complicated cases with contamination.

Keywords

Complicated hernia Contaminated fields Porcine dermal collagen 

References

  1. 1.
    Dunne JR, Malone DL, Tracy JK, Napolitano LM (2003) Abdominal wall hernias: risk factors for infection and resource utilization. J Surg Res 111:78–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fernandez Lobato R, Martinez Santos C, Ortega Deballon P, Fradejas Lopez JM, Marin Lucas FJ, Moreno Azcoita M (2001) Colocutaneous fistula due to polypropylene mesh. Hernia 5(2):107–109PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Munegato G, Brandolese R (2001) Respiratory physiopathology in surgical repair for large incisional hernias of the abdominal wall. J Am Coll Surg 192(3):298–304PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cassar K, Munro A (2002) Surgical treatment of incisional hernia. Br J Surg 89(5):534–545PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sarmah BD (1984) Porcine dermal collagen repair of incisional herniae. Br J Surg 71(7):524–525PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Harper C (2001) Permacol: clinical experience with a new biomaterial. Hosp Med 62(2):90–95PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Saray A (2003) Porcine dermal collagen [Permacol] for facial contour augmentation: preliminary report. Aesthetic Plast Surg 27(5):368–375PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Klein B, Schiffer R, Hafemann B, Klosterhalfen B, Zwadlo-Klarwasser G (2001) Inflammatory response to a porcine membrane composed of fibrous collagen and elastin as dermal substitute. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2(5):419–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zheng F, Lin Y, Verbeken E, Claerhout F, Fastrez M, De Ridder D, Deprest J (2004) Host response after reconstruction of abdominal wall defects with porcine dermal collagen in a rat model. Am J Obstet Gynecol 191(6):1961–1970PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Moore RD, Miklos JR, Kohli N (2004) Rectovaginal fistula repair using a porcine dermal graft. Obstet Gynecol 104(5):1165–1167PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Holl-Allen RT (1984) Porcine dermal collagen repair of inguinal hernias. J R Coll Surg Edinb 29(3):154–157PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Campanelli G, Nicolosi FM, Pettinari D, Avesani EC (2004) Prosthetic repair, intestinal resection, and potentially contaminated areas: safe and feasible? Hernia 8(3):190–192PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Catena F, Ansaloni L, Leone A, De Cataldis A, Gagliardi S, Gazzotti F, Peruzzi S, Agrusti S, D’Alessandro L, Taffurelli M (2005) Lichtenstein repair of inguinal hernia with Surgisis inguinal hernia matrix soft-tissue graft in immunodepressed patients. Hernia 9(1):29–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Franklin ME Jr, Gonzalez JJ Jr, Glass JL (2004) Use of porcine small intestinal submucosa as a prosthetic device for laparoscopic repair of hernias in contaminated fields: 2-year follow-up. Hernia 8(3):186–189PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Trevino JM, Franklin ME Jr, Berghoff KR, Glass JL, Jaramillo EJ (2006) Preliminary results of a two-layered prosthetic repair for recurrent inguinal and ventral hernias combining open and laparoscopic techniques. Hernia 10(3):253–257PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cobb GA, Shaffer J (2005) Cross-linked acellular porcine dermal collagen implant in laparoscopic ventral hernia repair: case-controlled study of operative variables and early complications. Int Surg 90[Suppl 3]:S24PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Liyanage SH, Purohit GS, Frye JN, Giordano P (2005) Anterior abdominal wall reconstruction with a Permacol implant. Br J Plast Surg 22:553–555Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kaleya RN (2005) Evaluation of implant/host tissue interactions following intraperitoneal implantation of porcine dermal collagen prosthesis in the rat. Hernia 9(3):269–276PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Adedeji OA, Bailey CA, Varma JS (2002) Porcine dermal collagen graft in abdominal-wall reconstruction. Br J Plast Surg 55(1):85–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hengirmen S, Cete M, Soran A, Aksoy F, Sencer H, Olcay E (1998) Comparison of meshes for the repair of experimental abdominal wall defects. J Invest Surg 11(5):315–325PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. Catena
    • 1
  • L. Ansaloni
    • 1
  • F. Gazzotti
    • 1
  • S. Gagliardi
    • 1
  • S. Di Saverio
    • 1
  • L. D’Alessandro
    • 1
  • A. D. Pinna
    • 1
  1. 1.General, Emergency and Transplant Surgery DPTSt. Orsola-Malpighi University HospitalBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations