Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Abdominal wall defect repair with biological prosthesis in transplanted patients: single center retrospective analysis and review of the literature

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Updates in Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The risk of fascial dehiscence, wound infection and incisional hernias in organ recipients is higher. Retrospective analysis of our departments database, checking the last 12 years (2000–2012), and of the literature (1966–2012) were conducted. In our database we found seven patients: five liver (71.4 %), one kidney (14.3 %), one multivisceral (14.3 %); five males (71.4 %), two females (28.6 %). Five (71.4 %) were operated in urgency setting and two in ordinary setting (28.6 %). The mean/median number of laparotomies before the incisional hernia is of 2.1/1 (range 1–5). In five patients swine intestinal submucosa (71.4 %) have been used and in two porcine dermal collagen (28.6 %). The mean/median age was 48.3/52 years (range 18–61). The mean/median body mass index was 26.7/27 (range 19–34). The mean/median for follow-up after intervention was 40.1/33 months (range 50–21). Recurrence rate was 14.3 %. Complication rate was 28.6 %. Adding the present report, the literature reports 70 cases. 20 % of prosthesis have been implanted inlay, 25.7 % underlay, in 5.7 % intraperitoneal and in 48.6 % were not specified. The mean age ranges from 0.7 to 48.3 years. Kidney, liver, pancreas, bowel and multivisceral transplant are reported. Porcine dermal collagen has been implanted in 24.3 %, human dermal collagen in 51.4 % and swine intestinal submucosa in 24.3 %. The immunosuppression regimens comprehend variable associations of tacrolimus, steroids, mycophenolate mofetil, sirolimus, thymoglobulin, azathioprine/basiliximab and daclizumab. The mean follow-up is 16.2 months. The mean complication rate is 9.4 %. Biological prosthesis seems to be useful and safe in abdominal wall repair surgery in transplanted patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Li EN, Silverman RP, Goldberg NH (2005) Icisional hernia repair in renal transplantation patients. Hernia 9:231–237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Humar A, Ramcharan T, Denny R, Gillingham KJ, Payne WD, Matas AJ (2001) Are wound complications after kidney transplant more common with modern immunosuppression? Transplantation 72:1920–1923

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Brewer MB, Rada EM, Milburn ML, Goldberg NH, Singh DP, Cooper M, Silvermann RP (2011) Human acellular dermal matrix for ventral hernia repair reduces morbidity in transplant patients. Hernia 15:141–145

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Chang EI, Galvez MG, Padilla BE, Freise CE, Foster RD, Hoffman WY (2011) Ten years retrospective analysis of incisional herniorrhaphy following renal transplantation. Arch Surg 146(1):21–25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Laschke MW, Haufel JM, Roller J, Schorr H, Menger MD (2009) Rapamycin, but not cyclosporine A, inhibits vascularization and incorporation of implanted surgical meshes. Transpl Int 22:654–662

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Pentlow A, Smart NJ, Richards SK, Inward CD, Morgan JDT (2008) The use of porcine dermal collagen implants in assisting abdominal wall closure of pediatric renal transplant recipients with donor size discrepancy. Pediatr Transplant 12:20–23

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Karpelowsky JS, Thomas G, Shum A (2009) Definitive abdominal wall closure using a porcine intestinal submucosa biodegradable membrane in pediatric transplantation. Pediatr Transplant 13:285–289

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Charles CA, Kato T, Tzakis AG, Miller BN, Kirsner RS (2004) Use of a living dermal equivalent for a refractory abdominal wall defect after pediatric multivisceral transplantation. Deramtol Surg 30:1236–1240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Luijendijk RW, Hop WC, van den Tol MP, de Lange DC, Braaksma MM, IJzermans JN, Boelhouwer RU (2000) A comparison of suture repair with mesh repair for incisional hernia. N Engl J Med 343(6):392–398

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Bingener J, Buck L, Richards M, Michalek J, Schwesinger S, Sirinek K (2007) Longterms outcomes in laparoscopic versus open ventral hernia repair. Arch Surg 142(6):562–567

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Safadi BJ, Duh QY (2001) Minimally invasive approaches to inguinal hernia repair. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 11(6):361–366

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Utler CE, Langstein HN, Kronowitz SJ (2005) Pelvic, abdominal and chest wall reconstruction with alloderm in patients at increased risk for mesh-related complications. Plast Reconstr Surg 116(5):1263–1277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gupta A, Zahrya K, Mullens PL, Salmassi S, Keshishian A (2006) Ventral herniorrhaphy: experience with two different biosynthetic materials, surgisis and alloderm. Hernia 10(5):419–425

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Alaedeen DI, Lipman J, Medalie D, Rosen MJ (2007) The single-staged approach to the surgical management of abdominal wall hernias in contaminated fields. Hernia 11(1):41–45

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Chang EI, Foster RD, Hansen SL, Jazayeri L, Patti MG (2007) Autologous tissue reconstruction of ventral hernias in morbidly obese patients. Arch Surg 142(8):746–751

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Espinosa-de-Los-Monteros A, de la Torre JI, Ahumada LA, Person DW, Rosenberg LZ, Va’sconez LO (2006) Reconstruction of the abdominal wall for incisional hernia repair. Am J Surg 191(2):173–177

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Dumanian GA, Denham W (2003) Comparison of repair techniques for major incisional hernias. Am J Surg 185(1):61–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mathes SJ, Steinwald PM, Foster RD, Hoffman WY, Anthony JP (2000) Complex abdominal wall reconstruction: a comparison of flap and mesh closure. Ann Surg 232(4):586–596

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Ansaloni L, Catena F, Coccolini F, Fini M, Gazzotti F, Giardino R, Pinna AD (2009) Peritoneal adhesions to prosthetic materials: an experimental comparative study of treated and untreated polypropylene meshes placed in the abdominal cavity. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 19(3):369–374

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Gaertner WB, Bonsack ME, Delaney JP (2007) Experimental evaluation of four biologic prostheses for abdominal hernia repair. J Gastrointest Surg 11:1275–1285

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Catena F, Ansaloni L, D’Alessandro L, Pinna A (2007) Adverse effects of porcine small intestine submucosa (SIS) implants in experimental ventral hernia repair. Surg Endosc 21(4):690

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Wilshaw SP, Burke D, Fisher J, Ingham E (2007) Investigation of the anti-adhesive properties of human mesothelial cells cultured in vitro on implantable surgical materials. TERMIS North America Conference, Toronto, pp 13–16

    Google Scholar 

  23. Ansaloni L, Catena F, Coccolini F, Negro P, Campanelli G, Miserez M (2009) New “biological” meshes: the need for a register. The EHS registry for biological prostheses: call for participating european surgeons. Hernia 13(1):103–108

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Ansaloni L, Catena F, Coccolini F, Gazzotti F, D’Alessandro L (2009) Daniele pinna A inguinal hernia repair with porcine small intestine submucosa: 3-year follow-up results of a randomized controlled trial of lichtenstein’s repair with polypropylene mesh versus surgisis inguinal hernia matrix. Am J Surg 198:303–312

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Campanelli G, Catena F, Ansaloni L (2008) Prosthetic abdominal wall hernia repair in emergency surgery: from polypropylene to biological meshes. World J Emerg Surg 4(3):33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Ansaloni L, Catena F, Gagliardi S, Gazzotti F, D’Alessandro L, Pinna AD (2007) Hernia repair with porcine small-intestinal submucosa. Hernia 11(4):321–326

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Gagliardi S, Ansaloni L, Catena F, Gazzotti F, D’Alessandro L, Pinna AD (2007) Hernioplasty with surgisis(R) inguinal hernia matrix (IHM) trade mark. Surg Technol Int 16:128–133

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Catena F, Ansaloni L, Gazzotti F, Gagliardi S, Di Saverio S, D’Alessandro L, Pinna AD (2007) Use of porcine dermal collagen graft (Permacol) for hernia repair in contaminated fields. Hernia 11(1):57–60

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Catena F, Ansaloni L, Leone A, De Cataldis A, Gagliardi S, Gazzotti F, Peruzzi S et al (2005) Lichtenstein repair of inguinal hernia with surgisis inguinal hernia matrix soft-tissue graft in immuno depressed patients. Hernia 9(1):29–31

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Ansaloni L, Catena F, D’Alessandro L (2003) Prospective randomized, double-blind, controlled trial comparing Lichtenstein’s repair of inguinal hernia with polypropylene mesh versus surgisis gold soft tissue graft: preliminary results. Acta Biomed 74(Suppl 2):10–14

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Ansaloni L, Catena F, Coccolini F, Negro P, Campanelli G, Miserez M (2009) New “biological” meshes: the need for a register. The EHS registry for biological prostheses: call for participating European surgeons. Hernia 13(1):103–108

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Cavallaro A, LoMenzo E, DiVita M, Zanghì A, Cavallaro V, Veroux PF, Cappellani A (2010) Use of biological meshes for abdominal wall reconstruction in highly contaminated fields. World J Gastroenterol 16(15):1928–1933

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Allman AJ, McPherson TB, Badylak SF, Merril RC, Kallakury B, Sheehan C, Raeder RH, Metzger DW (2001) Xenogenic extracellular matrix grafts elicits a TH2-restricted immune response. Transplantation 71:1631–1640

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Record RD, Hillegonds D, Simmons C, Tullius R, Rickey FA, Elmore D, Badylak SF (2001) In vivo degradation of 14-C labelled small intestine submucosa (SIS) when used for urinary bladder repair. Biomaterials 22:2653–2659

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Badylak S, Kokini K, Tuyllius B, Symmons-Byrd A, Morff R (2002) Mosphologic study of small intestinal submucosa as a body wall repair device. J Surg Res 103:190–202

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. der Hartog D, Dur AHM, Tuinebreijer WE, Kreis RW (2008) Open surgical procedures for incisional hernias. Cochrane Database of Systematic, Issue 3 Art No: CD006438

  37. Smart NJ, Marshall M, Daniels IR (2012) Biological meshes: a review of their use in abdominal wall hernia repairs. Surgeon 10:159–171

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Butler CE (2006) The role of bioprosthetics in abdominal wall reconstruction. Clin Plast Surg 33(2):199–211

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Ferrara R, Imperiale S, Polato R, Frena A, Martin F (2008) Impianto di protesi biologica di collagene di derma porcino per laparocele complesso: caso clinico. Osp Ital Chir 14:451–454

    Google Scholar 

  40. Santangelo ML, Carlomagno N, Spiezia S, Palmieri D, Clemente M, Piantadosi MP, Palumbo F, Docimo G, Normanno N, Renda A (2012) Use of biological prostheses in transplant patients with incisional hernias preliminary experience. Ann Ital Chir Oct 29 (Epub ahead of print)

  41. Asham E, Uknis ME, Rastellini C, Elias G, Cicalese L (2006) Acellular dermal matrix provides a good option for abdominal wall closure following small bowel transplantation: a case report. Transplant Proc 38:1770–1771

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Charles C, Kato T, Tzakis A, Miller B, Kirsner R (2004) Use of living dermal equivalent for refractory abdominal defect after pediatric multivisceral transplantation. Dermatol Surg 30:1236–1240

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Coccolini F, Agresta F, Bassi A, Catena F, Crovella F, Ferrara R, Gossetti F, Marchi D, Munegato G, Negro P, Piccoli M, Melotti G, Sartelli M, di Visconte MS, Testini M, Bertoli P, Capponi MG, Lotti M, Manfredi R, Pisano M, Poiasina E, Poletti E, Ansaloni L (2012) Italian biological prosthesis work-group (IBPWG): proposal for a decisional model in using biological prosthesis. World J Emerg Surg 7(1):34

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

All authors declare no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Unit of General Surgery, Papa Giovanni XXIII hospital, P.zza OMS 1, 24127, Bergamo, Italy

    Federico Coccolini & Luca Ansaloni

  2. Unit of General, Emergency and Transplant Surgery, St. Orsola-Malpighi University Hospital, Bologna, Italy

    Federico Coccolini, Fausto Catena, Valentina R. Bertuzzo, Giorgio Ercolani, Antonio Pinna & Luca Ansaloni

  3. Unit of Emergency Surgery, Ospedale Maggiore, Parma, Italy

    Fausto Catena

Authors
  1. Federico Coccolini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fausto Catena
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Valentina R. Bertuzzo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Giorgio Ercolani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Antonio Pinna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Luca Ansaloni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Federico Coccolini.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Coccolini, F., Catena, F., Bertuzzo, V.R. et al. Abdominal wall defect repair with biological prosthesis in transplanted patients: single center retrospective analysis and review of the literature. Updates Surg 65, 191–196 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-013-0212-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-013-0212-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation