Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Biologic Mesh in Surgery: A Comprehensive Review and Meta-Analysis of Selected Outcomes in 51 Studies and 6079 Patients

  • Surgical Symposium Contribution
  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

In recent decades, biologic mesh (BM) has become an important adjunct to surgical practice. Recent evidence-based clinical applications of BM include but are not limited to: reconstruction of abdominal wall defects; breast reconstruction; face, head and neck surgery; periodontal surgery; other hernia repairs (diaphragmatic, hiatal/paraesophageal, inguinal and perineal); hand surgery; and shoulder arthroplasty. Prior systematic reviews of BM in complex abdominal wall hernia repair had several shortcomings that our comprehensive review seeks to address, including exclusion of laparoscopic repair, assessment of risk of bias, use of an acceptable meta-analytic method and review of risk factors identified in multivariable regression analyses.

Materials and methods

We sought articles of BM for open ventral hernia repair reporting on early complications, late complications or recurrences and included minimum of 50. We used the quality in prognostic studies risk of bias assessment tool. Random effects meta-analysis was applied.

Results

This comprehensive review selected 62 articles from 51 studies that included 6,079 patients. Meta-analytic pooling found that early complications are present in about 50%, surgical site occurrences (SSOs) in 37%, surgical site infections (SSIs) in 18%, reoperation in 7%, readmission in 20% and mortality in 3%. Meta-analytic estimates of late outcomes included overall complications (42%), SSOs (40%) and SSIs (22%). Specific SSOs included seroma (14%), hematoma (4%), abscess (10%), necrosis (5%), dehiscence (8%) and fistula formation (5%). Reoperation occurred in about 17%, mesh explantation in 9% and recurrence in 36%.

Conclusion

Estimates of nearly all outcomes from individual studies were highly heterogeneous and sensitivity analyses and meta-regressions generally failed to explain this heterogeneity. Recurrence is the only outcome for which there are consistent findings for risk factors. Bridge placement of BM is associated with higher risk of recurrence. Prior hernia repair, history of reintervention and history of mesh removal were also risk factors for increased recurrence.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Antony AK, Robinson EC (2019) An Algorithmic Approach to Prepectoral Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction: Version 2.0. Plast Reconstr Surg. 143(5):1311–1319

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bi S, Liu R, Wu B, Shen Y, Jia K, Sun K et al (2020) Breast Implants for Mammaplasty: An Umbrella Review of Meta-analyses of Multiple Complications. Aesthetic Plast Surg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-020-01866-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Checketts JX, Gordon J, Crawford JH, Adams H, Duckett L, Vassar M (2018) Is the Right Research Being Conducted to Advance Knowledge about Breast Reconstruction? An Analysis of the Research Pipeline. Plast Reconstr Surg 141(3):566–577

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hallberg H, Rafnsdottir S, Selvaggi G, Strandell A, Samuelsson O, Stadig I et al (2018) Benefits and risks with acellular dermal matrix (ADM) and mesh support in immediate breast reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Plast Surg Hand Surg 52(3):130–147

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ho G, Nguyen TJ, Shahabi A, Hwang BH, Chan LS, Wong AK (2012) A systematic review and meta-analysis of complications associated with acellular dermal matrix-assisted breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 68(4):346–356

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jordan SW, Khavanin N, Kim JYS (2016) Seroma in Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 137(4):1104–1116

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Labadie JG, Korta DZ, Barton N, Mesinkovska NA (2018) Cutaneous Hypersensitivity-Like Reactions Associated With Breast Implants: A Review. Dermatol Surg Off Publ Am Soc Dermatol Surg Al 44(3):323–329

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Macarios D, Franz M, Dawidczyk AM (2014) Complex ventral hernia repair using components separation with or without biologic mesh: a cost-utility analysis. Ann Plast Surg 72(5):610

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Potter S, Browning D, Savović J, Holcombe C, Blazeby JM (2015) Systematic review and critical appraisal of the impact of acellular dermal matrix use on the outcomes of implant-based breast reconstruction. Br J Surg 102(9):1010–1025

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sbitany H, Serletti JM (2011) Acellular dermis-assisted prosthetic breast reconstruction: a systematic and critical review of efficacy and associated morbidity. Plast Reconstr Surg 128(6):1162–1169

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Skovsted Yde S, Brunbjerg ME, Damsgaard TE (2016) Acellular dermal matrices in breast reconstructions - a literature review. J Plast Surg Hand Surg 50(4):187–196

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Wan D, Rohrich RJ (2016) Revisiting the Management of Capsular Contracture in Breast Augmentation: A Systematic Review. Plast Reconstr Surg 137(3):826–841

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Jansen LA, De Caigny P, Guay NA, Lineaweaver WC, Shokrollahi K (2013) The evidence base for the acellular dermal matrix AlloDerm: a systematic review. Ann Plast Surg 70(5):587–594

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Aldekhayel SA, Sinno H, Gilardino MS (2012) Acellular dermal matrix in cleft palate repair: an evidence-based review. Plast Reconstr Surg 130(1):177–182

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Antoniou SA, Müller-Stich BP, Antoniou GA, Köhler G, Luketina R-R, Koch OO et al (2015) Laparoscopic augmentation of the diaphragmatic hiatus with biologic mesh versus suture repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Langenbecks Arch Surg 400(5):577–583

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Antoniou SA, Pointner R, Granderath F-A, Köckerling F (2015) The Use of Biological Meshes in Diaphragmatic Defects - An Evidence-Based Review of the Literature. Front Surg 2:56

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Ellis CV, Kulber DA (2012) Acellular dermal matrices in hand reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 130(5 Suppl 2):256S-S269

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Shridharani SM, Tufaro AP (2012) A systematic review of acelluar dermal matrices in head and neck reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 130(5 Suppl 2):35S-43S

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Fang Z, Ren F, Zhou J, Tian J (2015) Biologic mesh versus synthetic mesh in open inguinal hernia repair: system review and meta-analysis. ANZ J Surg 85(12):910–916

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hui A, Hong P, Bezuhly M (2017) Use of acellular dermal matrices in laryngotracheal and pharyngeal reconstruction: systematic review. J Laryngol Otol 131(7):585–592

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Li C, Yang X, Pan J, Shi Z, Li L (2013) Graft for prevention of Frey syndrome after parotidectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Oral Maxillofac Surg Off J Am Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 71(2):419–427

    Google Scholar 

  22. Wang W, Fan J, Sun C, Chen Y, Zhao H, Ma H et al (2013) Systematic evaluation on the use of acellular dermis matrix graft in prevention Frey syndrome after parotid neoplasm surgery. J Craniofac Surg 24(5):1526–1529

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Narang SK, Alam NN, Köckerling F, Daniels IR, Smart NJ (2016) Repair of Perineal Hernia Following Abdominoperineal Excision with Biological Mesh: A Systematic Review. Front Surg 3:49

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Barootchi S, Tavelli L, Zucchelli G, Giannobile WV (2020) Wang H-L. A network meta-analysis. J Periodontol, Gingival phenotype modification therapies on natural teeth, p 11

    Google Scholar 

  25. Cairo F, Nieri M, Pagliaro U (2014) Efficacy of periodontal plastic surgery procedures in the treatment of localized facial gingival recessions. A systematic review J Clin Periodontol 41(Suppl 15):S44-62

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Chambrone L, de Castro Pinto RCN (2000) Chambrone LA (2019) The concepts of evidence-based periodontal plastic surgery: Application of the principles of evidence-based dentistry for the treatment of recession-type defects. Periodontol 79(1):81–106

    Google Scholar 

  27. Chambrone L, Tatakis DN (2015) Periodontal soft tissue root coverage procedures: a systematic review from the AAP Regeneration Workshop. J Periodontol 86(2 Suppl):S8-51

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. de Carvalho FM, Nagasawa MA, Moraschini V, Ata-Ali J, Sculean A, Shibli JA (2020) Clinical efficacy of xenogeneic and allogeneic 3D matrix in the management of gingival recession: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Investig 24(7):2229–2245

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hofmänner P, Alessandri R, Laugisch O, Aroca S, Salvi GE, Stavropoulos A et al (1985) (2012) Predictability of surgical techniques used for coverage of multiple adjacent gingival recessions–A systematic review. Quintessence Int Berl Ger 43(7):545–54

    Google Scholar 

  30. Moraschini V, Calasans-Maia MD, Dias AT, de Carvalho FM, Sartoretto SC, Sculean A et al (2020) Effectiveness of connective tissue graft substitutes for the treatment of gingival recessions compared with coronally advanced flap: a network meta-analysis. Clin Oral Investig. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2009.080253

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Tatakis DN, Chambrone L, Allen EP, Langer B, McGuire MK, Richardson CR et al (2015) Periodontal soft tissue root coverage procedures: a consensus report from the AAP Regeneration Workshop. J Periodontol 86(2 Suppl):S52-55

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Wu Q, Qu Y, Gong P, Wang T, Gong T, Man Y (2015) Evaluation of the efficacy of keratinized mucosa augmentation techniques around dental implants: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent 113(5):383–390

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Meaike JJ, Patterson DC, Anthony SG, Parsons BO, Cagle PJ (2020) Soft tissue resurfacing for glenohumeral arthritis: a systematic review. Shoulder Elb 12(1):3–11

    Google Scholar 

  34. Nahabedian MY, Sosin M, Bhanot P (2018) A Current Review of Biologic Meshes in Abdominal Wall Reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 142(3 Suppl):74S-81S

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Latifi R (2016) Practical Approaches to Definitive Reconstruction of Complex Abdominal Wall Defects. World J Surg 40(4):836–848

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Slater NJ, Montgomery A, Berrevoet F, Carbonell AM, Chang A, Franklin M et al (2014) Criteria for definition of a complex abdominal wall hernia. Hernia J Hernias Abdom Wall Surg 18(1):7–17

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Smith J, Parmely JD. Ventral Hernia. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2020 [cited 2020 Aug 26]. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK499927/

  38. Parker SG, Halligan S, Blackburn S, Plumb A, a. O, Archer L, Mallett S, et al (2019) What Exactly is Meant by “Loss of Domain” for Ventral Hernia? Systematic Review of Definitions. World J Surg. 43(2):396–404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-018-4783-7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Poulose BK, Shelton J, Phillips S, Moore D, Nealon W, Penson D et al (2012) Epidemiology and cost of ventral hernia repair: making the case for hernia research. Hernia J Hernias Abdom Wall Surg 16(2):179–183

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Beadles CA, Meagher AD, Charles AG (2015) Trends in emergent hernia repair in the United States. JAMA Surg 150(3):194–200

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Sandø A, Rosen MJ, Heniford BT, Bisgaard T (2020) Long-term patient-reported outcomes and quality of the evidence in ventral hernia mesh repair: a systematic review. Hernia J Hernias Abdom Wall Surg 24(4):695–705

    Google Scholar 

  42. Mauch JT, Enriquez FA, Shea JA, Barg FK, Rhemtulla IA, Broach RB et al (2020) The Abdominal Hernia-Q: Development, Psychometric Evaluation and Prospective Testing. Ann Surg 271(5):949–957

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Manoharan S, Liu G, Crump RT, Karimuddin AA, Scott TM, Sutherland JM (2020) Incisional hernia repair surgery improves patient reported outcomes. Am J Surg 219(5):874–878

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Park E, Cheesborough JE, Souza JM, Dumanian GA (2017) Open repair of incisional ventral abdominal hernias with mesh leads to long-term improvement in pain interference as measured by patient-reported outcomes. Am J Surg 213(1):58–63

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Nissen AT, Henn D, Moshrefi S, Gupta D, Nazerali R, Lee GK (2019) Health-Related Quality of Life After Ventral Hernia Repair With Biologic and Synthetic Mesh. Ann Plast Surg. 82((5S Suppl 4)):S332-8

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Licari L, Guercio G, Campanella S, Scerrino G, Bonventre S, Tutino R et al (2019) Clinical and Functional Outcome After Abdominal Wall Incisional Hernia Repair: Evaluation of Quality-of-Life Improvement and Comparison of Assessment Scales. World J Surg. 43(8):1914–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-019-05003-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Visschers RGJ, van Gemert WG, Winkens B, Soeters PB, Olde Damink SWM (2012) Guided treatment improves outcome of patients with enterocutaneous fistulas. World J Surg. 36(10):2341–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-012-1663-4

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Hodgkinson JD, Maeda Y, Leo CA, Warusavitarne J, Vaizey CJ (2017) Complex abdominal wall reconstruction in the setting of active infection and contamination: a systematic review of hernia and fistula recurrence rates. Colorectal Dis Off J Assoc Coloproctology G B Irel 19(4):319–330

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Kamarajah SK, Chapman SJ, Glasbey J, Morton D, Smart N, Pinkney T et al (2018) Systematic review of the stage of innovation of biological mesh for complex or contaminated abdominal wall closure. BJS Open 2(6):371–380

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Huerta S, Varshney A, Patel PM, Mayo HG, Livingston EH (2016) Biological Mesh Implants for Abdominal Hernia Repair: US Food and Drug Administration Approval Process and Systematic Review of Its Efficacy. JAMA Surg 151(4):374–381

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Cross W, Kumar A, Chandru KG (2014) Biological mesh in contaminated fields–overuse without data: a systematic review of their use in abdominal wall reconstruction. Am Surg 80(1):3–8

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Darehzereshki A, Goldfarb M, Zehetner J, Moazzez A, Lipham JC, Mason RJ et al (2014) Biologic versus nonbiologic mesh in ventral hernia repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg. 38(1):40–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-013-2232-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Bellows CF, Smith A, Malsbury J, Helton WS (2013) Repair of incisional hernias with biological prosthesis: a systematic review of current evidence. Am J Surg 205(1):85–101

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Ferzoco SJ (2013) A systematic review of outcomes following repair of complex ventral incisional hernias with biologic mesh. Int Surg 98(4):399–408

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Slater NJ, van der Kolk M, Hendriks T, van Goor H, Bleichrodt RP (2013) Biologic grafts for ventral hernia repair: a systematic review. Am J Surg 205(2):220–230

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Beale EW, Hoxworth RE, Livingston EH, Trussler AP (2012) The role of biologic mesh in abdominal wall reconstruction: a systematic review of the current literature. Am J Surg 204(4):510–517

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Janis JE, O’Neill AC, Ahmad J, Zhong T, Hofer SOP (2012) Acellular dermal matrices in abdominal wall reconstruction: a systematic review of the current evidence. Plast Reconstr Surg 130(5 Suppl 2):183S-S193

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Shankaran V, Weber DJ, Reed RL, Luchette FA (2011) A review of available prosthetics for ventral hernia repair. Ann Surg 253(1):16–26

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Zhong T, Janis JE, Ahmad J, Hofer SOP (2011) Outcomes after abdominal wall reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix: a systematic review. J Plast Reconstr Aesthetic Surg JPRAS 64(12):1562–1571

    Google Scholar 

  60. Hayden JA, van der Windt DA, Cartwright JL, Côté P, Bombardier C (2013) Assessing bias in studies of prognostic factors. Ann Intern Med 158(4):280–286

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. DerSimonian R, Laird N (1986) Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 7(3):177–188

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Hedges LV, Vevea JL (1998) Fixed and random effects models in meta-analysis. Psychol Methods. 3(4):486–504

    Google Scholar 

  63. Itani KMF, Rosen M, Vargo D, Awad SS, Denoto G, Butler CE et al (2012) Prospective study of single-stage repair of contaminated hernias using a biologic porcine tissue matrix: the RICH Study 227. Clinical Trial 152(3):498–505

    Google Scholar 

  64. Bochicchio GV, Garcia A, Kaufman J, Zhang Q, Horn C, Bochicchio K et al (2019) Evaluating the Impact of Technique and Mesh Type in Complicated Ventral Hernia Repair: A Prospective Randomized Multicenter Controlled Trial. J Am Coll Surg 228(4):377–390

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Huntington CR, Cox TC, Blair LJ, Schell S, Randolph D, Prasad T et al (2016) Biologic mesh in ventral hernia repair: Outcomes, recurrence and charge analysis. Surgery 160(6):1517–1527

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Heniford BT, Ross SW, Wormer BA, Walters AL, Lincourt AE, Colavita PD et al (2020) Preperitoneal Ventral Hernia Repair: A Decade Long Prospective Observational Study With Analysis of 1023 Patient Outcomes. Ann Surg 271(2):364–374

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Gogna S, Latifi R, Choi J, Con J, Prabhakaran K, Smiley A et al (2020) Predictors of 30- and 90-Day Readmissions After Complex Abdominal Wall Reconstruction With Biological Mesh: A Longitudinal Study of 232 Patients. World J Surg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-020-05714-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Abdelfatah MM, Rostambeigi N, Podgaetz E, Sarr MG (2015) Long-term outcomes (>5-year follow-up) with porcine acellular dermal matrix (Permacol) in incisional hernias at risk for infection. Hernia J Hernias Abdom Wall Surg 19(1):135–140

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Atema JJ, Furnée EJ, Maeda Y, Warusavitarne J, Tanis PJ, Bemelman WA et al (2017) Major Complex Abdominal Wall Repair in Contaminated Fields with Use of a Non-cross-linked Biologic Mesh: A Dual-Institutional Experience. World J Surg. 41(8):1993–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-017-3962-2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Baldan N, Munegato G, Di Leo A, Lauro E, Morpurgo E, Pianigiani S et al (2020) Lessons learned from 227 biological meshes used for the surgical treatment of ventral abdominal defects. Hernia J Hernias Abdom Wall Surg 24(1):57–65

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Bochicchio GV, De Castro GP, Bochicchio KM, Weeks J, Rodriguez E, Scalea TM (2013) Comparison study of acellular dermal matrices in complicated hernia surgery. J Am Coll Surg 217(4):606–613

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Bondre IL, Holihan JL, Askenasy EP, Greenberg JA, Keith JN, Martindale RG et al (2016) Suture, synthetic, or biologic in contaminated ventral hernia repair. J Surg Res 200(2):488–494

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Boules M, Strong AT, Corcelles R, Haskins IN, Ilie R, Wathen C et al (2018) Single-center ventral hernia repair with porcine dermis collagen implant. Surg Endosc 32(4):1820–1827

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Brinas P, Chalret du Rieu M, Tuyeras G, Julio CH, Kirzin S, Ghouti L et al (2018) Mid-term outcomes after biologic mesh use: Does their performance meet our expectations? J Visc Surg. 155(5):355–63

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Byrnes MC, Irwin E, Carlson D, Campeau A, Gipson JC, Beal A et al (2011) Repair of high-risk incisional hernias and traumatic abdominal wall defects with porcine mesh. Am Surg 77(2):144–150

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Cheng AW, Abbas MA, Tejirian T (2013) Outcome of abdominal wall hernia repair with PermacolTM biologic mesh. Am Surg 79(10):992–996

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Cheng AW, Abbas MA, Tejirian T (2014) Outcome of abdominal wall hernia repair with biologic mesh: PermacolTM versus StratticeTM. Am Surg 80(10):999–1002

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Clemens MW, Selber JC, Liu J, Adelman DM, Baumann DP, Garvey PB et al (2013) Bovine versus porcine acellular dermal matrix for complex abdominal wall reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 131(1):71–79

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. de Vries FEE, Hodgkinson JD, Claessen JJM, van Ruler O, Leo CA, Maeda Y et al (2020) Long-term outcomes after contaminated complex abdominal wall reconstruction. Hernia J Hernias Abdom Wall Surg 24(3):459–468

    Google Scholar 

  80. Denney B, de la Torre JI (2017) Multipoint Suture Fixation Technique for Abdominal Wall Reconstruction with Component Separation and Onlay Biological Mesh Placement. Am Surg 83(5):515–521

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Diaz JJ, Guy J, Berkes MB, Guillamondegui O, Miller RS (2006) Acellular dermal allograft for ventral hernia repair in the compromised surgical field. Am Surg. 72(12):1181–7

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Diaz JJ, Conquest AM, Ferzoco SJ, Vargo D, Miller P, Wu Y-C et al (2009) Multi-institutional experience using human acellular dermal matrix for ventral hernia repair in a compromised surgical field. Arch Surg. 144(3):209–15

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Doussot A, Abo-Alhassan F, Derbal S, Fournel I, Kasereka-Kisenge F, Codjia T, et al (2019) Indications and Outcomes of a Cross-Linked Porcine Dermal Collagen Mesh (Permacol) for Complex Abdominal Wall Reconstruction: A Multicenter Audit. World J Surg. 43(3):791–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-018-4853-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Fayezizadeh M, Majumder A, Belyansky I, Novitsky YW (2016) Outcomes of Retromuscular Porcine Biologic Mesh Repairs Using Transversus Abdominis Release Reconstruction. J Am Coll Surg 223(3):461–468

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Garvey PB, Martinez RA, Baumann DP, Liu J, Butler CE (2014) Outcomes of abdominal wall reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix are not affected by wound contamination. J Am Coll Surg 219(5):853–864

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Garvey PB, Giordano SA, Baumann DP, Liu J, Butler CE (2017) Long-Term Outcomes after Abdominal Wall Reconstruction with Acellular Dermal Matrix. J Am Coll Surg 224(3):341–350

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Gassman A, Mehta A, Bucholdz E, Abthani A, Guerra O, Maclin MM et al (2015) Positive outcomes with negative pressure therapy over primarily closed large abdominal wall reconstruction reduces surgical site infection rates. Hernia J Hernias Abdom Wall Surg 19(2):273–278

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Ghazi B, Deigni O, Yezhelyev M, Losken A (2011) Current options in the management of complex abdominal wall defects. Ann Plast Surg 66(5):488–492

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Ghetti M, Bondioli E, Purpura V, Cenacchi G, Ruscelli P, Melandri D (2017) Decellularized human dermal matrix produced by a skin bank A new treatment for abdominal wall defects. Ann Ital Chir 5:443–448

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Giordano P, Pullan RD, Ystgaard B, Gossetti F, Bradburn M, McKinley AJ et al (2015) The use of an acellular porcine dermal collagen implant in the repair of complex abdominal wall defects: a European multicentre retrospective study. Tech Coloproctology 19(7):411–417

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Gogna S, Latifi R, Policastro A, Prabhakaran K, Anderson P, Con J et al (2020) Complex abdominal wall hernia repair with biologic mesh in elderly: a propensity matched analysis. Hernia J Hernias Abdom Wall Surg 24(3):495–502

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. Gupta A, Zahriya K, Mullens PL, Salmassi S, Keshishian A (2006) Ventral herniorrhaphy: experience with two different biosynthetic mesh materials, Surgisis and Alloderm. Hernia J Hernias Abdom Wall Surg 10(5):419–425

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  93. Han JG, Pang GY, Wang ZJ, Zhao Q, Ma SZ (2014) The combined application of human acellular dermal matrix and vacuum wound drainage on incarcerated abdominal wall hernias. Int J Surg Lond Engl 12(5):452–456

    Google Scholar 

  94. Hood K, Millikan K, Pittman T, Zelhart M, Secemsky B, Rajan M et al (2013) Abdominal wall reconstruction: a case series of ventral hernia repair using the component separation technique with biologic mesh. Am J Surg. 205(3):322–7

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Hope WW, Griner D, Adams A, Hooks WB, Clancy TV (2012) Use and indications of human acellular dermis in ventral hernia repair at a community hospital. Plast Surg Int 2012:918345

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  96. Hufford T, Tremblay J-F, Mustafa Sheikh MT, Marecik S, Park J, Zamfirova I et al (2018) Local parastomal hernia repair with biological mesh is safe and effective. Am J Surg 215(1):88–90

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Iacco A, Adeyemo A, Riggs T, Janczyk R (2014) Single institutional experience using biological mesh for abdominal wall reconstruction. Am J Surg. 208(3):480–4

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Kaufmann R, Timmermans L, van Loon YT, Vroemen JPAM, Jeekel J, Lange JF (2019) Repair of complex abdominal wall hernias with a cross-linked porcine acellular matrix: cross-sectional results of a Dutch cohort study. Int J Surg Lond Engl 65:120–127

    Google Scholar 

  99. Latifi R, Samson D, Haider A, Azim A, Iftikhar H, Joseph B et al (2017) Risk-adjusted adverse outcomes in complex abdominal wall hernia repair with biologic mesh: A case series of 140 patients. Int J Surg Lond Engl 43:26–32

    Google Scholar 

  100. Latifi R, Samson DJ, Gogna S, Joseph BA (2020) Perioperative complications of complex abdominal wall reconstruction with biologic mesh: A pooled retrospective cohort analysis of 220 patients from two academic centers. Int J Surg Lond Engl 74:94–99

    Google Scholar 

  101. Lee EI, Chike-Obi CJ, Gonzalez P, Garza R, Leong M, Subramanian A et al (2009) Abdominal wall repair using human acellular dermal matrix: a follow-up study. Am J Surg 198(5):650–657

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Liang MK, Berger RL, Nguyen MT, Hicks SC, Li LT, Leong M (2014) Outcomes with porcine acellular dermal matrix versus synthetic mesh and suture in complicated open ventral hernia repair. Surg Infect 15(5):506–512

    Google Scholar 

  103. Limura E, Giordano P (2017) Biological Implant for Complex Abdominal Wall Reconstruction: A Single Institution Experience and Review of Literature. World J Surg. 41(10):2492–501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-017-4066-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Lin HJ, Spoerke N, Deveney C, Martindale R (2009) Reconstruction of complex abdominal wall hernias using acellular human dermal matrix: a single institution experience. Am J Surg. 197(5):599–603

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Lindsey JT, Boyd CJ, Davis CB, Wilson JT, Kurapati S, de la Torre JI (2020) Alloderm and Cortiva Have Similar Perioperative Wound Complications in Abdominal Wall Reconstruction. J Surg Res 19(255):255–260

    Google Scholar 

  106. Majumder A, Winder JS, Wen Y, Pauli EM, Belyansky I, Novitsky YW (2016) Comparative analysis of biologic versus synthetic mesh outcomes in contaminated hernia repairs. Surgery 160(4):828–838

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Maurice SM, Skeete DA (2009) Use of human acellular dermal matrix for abdominal wall reconstructions. Am J Surg 197(1):35–42

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Maxwell DW, Hart AM, Keifer OP, Halani SH, Losken A (2019) A Comparison of Acellular Dermal Matrices in Abdominal Wall Reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 82(4):435–440

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Mayfield CK, Gould DJ, Wong A, Patel KM, Carey J (2019) Value Improvement and Resource Utilization in Complex Abdominal Wall Reconstruction. Am Surg 85(10):1113–1117

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Mericli AF, Garvey PB, Giordano S, Liu J, Baumann DP, Butler CE (2017) Abdominal Wall Reconstruction with Concomitant Ostomy-Associated Hernia Repair: Outcomes and Propensity Score Analysis. J Am Coll Surg 224(3):351-361.e2

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Misra S, Raj PK, Tarr SM, Treat RC (2008) Results of AlloDerm use in abdominal hernia repair. Hernia J Hernias Abdom Wall Surg 12(3):247–250

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  112. Patton JH, Berry S, Kralovich KA (2007) Use of human acellular dermal matrix in complex and contaminated abdominal wall reconstructions. Am J Surg. 193(3):360–3

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Pinell-White XA, Kapadia SM, Losken A (2014) The management of abdominal contour defects following TRAM flap breast reconstruction. Aesthet Surg J 34(2):264–271

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Razavi SA, Desai KA, Hart AM, Thompson PW, Losken A (2018) The Impact of Mesh Reinforcement with Components Separation for Abdominal Wall Reconstruction. Am Surg 84(6):959–962

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Rosen MJ, Krpata DM, Ermlich B, Blatnik JA (2013) A 5-year clinical experience with single-staged repairs of infected and contaminated abdominal wall defects utilizing biologic mesh. Ann Surg 257(6):991–996

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  116. Roth JS, Brathwaite C, Hacker K, Fisher K, King J (2015) Complex ventral hernia repair with a human acellular dermal matrix. Hernia J Hernias Abdom Wall Surg 19(2):247–252

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  117. Russello D, Sofia M, Conti P, Latteri S, Pesce A, Scaravilli F et al (2020) A retrospective, Italian multicenter study of complex abdominal wall defect repair with a Permacol biological mesh. Sci Rep. 10(1):3367

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  118. Sailes FC, Walls J, Guelig D, Mirzabeigi M, Long WD, Crawford A et al (2010) Synthetic and biological mesh in component separation: a 10-year single institution review. Ann Plast Surg 64(5):696–698

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  119. Sasse KC, Lambin J-H, Gevorkian J, Elliott C, Afshar R, Gardner A et al (2018) Long-term clinical, radiological and histological follow-up after complex ventral incisional hernia repair using urinary bladder matrix graft reinforcement: a retrospective cohort study. Hernia J Hernias Abdom Wall Surg 22(6):899–907

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  120. Shah BC, Tiwari MM, Goede MR, Eichler MJ, Hollins RR, McBride CL et al (2011) Not all biologics are equal! Hernia J Hernias Abdom Wall Surg 15(2):165–171

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  121. Singh DP, Zahiri HR, Gastman B, Holton LH, Stromberg JA, Chopra K et al (2014) A modified approach to component separation using biologic graft as a load-sharing onlay reinforcement for the repair of complex ventral hernia. Surg Innov 21(2):137–146

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  122. Skipworth JRA, Vyas S, Uppal L, Floyd D, Shankar A (2014) Improved outcomes in the management of high-risk incisional hernias utilizing biological mesh and soft-tissue reconstruction: a single center experience. World J Surg. 38(5):1026–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-013-2442-6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  123. Taibi A, Derbal S, Durand Fontanier S, Christou N, Fredon F, Bouvier S et al (2020) Implantation of biologic mesh in ventral hernia repair-does it make sense? Surg Endosc. 28(9):2531–2546

    Google Scholar 

  124. Totten CF, Davenport DL, Ward ND, Roth JS (2016) Cost of ventral hernia repair using biologic or synthetic mesh. J Surg Res. 203(2):459–65

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  125. Bochicchio GV, Jain A, McGonigal K, Turner D, Ilahi O, Reese S et al (2014) Biologic vs synthetic inguinal hernia repair: 1-year results of a randomized double-blinded trial. J Am Coll Surg 218(4):751–757

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  126. Köckerling F, Alam NN, Narang SK, Daniels IR, Smart NJ (2015) Biological Meshes for Inguinal Hernia Repair - Review of the Literature. Front Surg 2:48

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  127. Nachiappan S, Markar S, Karthikesalingam A, Karthikesaligam A, Ziprin P, Faiz O (2013) Prophylactic mesh placement in high-risk patients undergoing elective laparotomy: a systematic review. World J Surg. 37(8):1861–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-013-2046-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  128. Muysoms FE, Jairam A, López-Cano M, Śmietański M, Woeste G, Kyle-Leinhase I et al (2016) Prevention of Incisional Hernias with Biological Mesh: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Front Surg 3:53

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  129. Parker SG, Halligan S, Liang MK, Muysoms FE, Adrales GL, Boutall A et al (2020) International classification of abdominal wall planes (ICAP) to describe mesh insertion for ventral hernia repair. Br J Surg 107(3):209–217

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Westchester Medical Center, 100 Woods Road, Taylor Pavilion, Suite D-353, Valhalla, NY, 10595, USA

    David J. Samson & Rifat Latifi

  2. Department of Surgery, New York Medical College, School of Medicine, Valhalla, NY, 10595, USA

    Mahir Gachabayov & Rifat Latifi

Authors
  1. David J. Samson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mahir Gachabayov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rifat Latifi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rifat Latifi.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file 1 (DOCX 425 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Samson, D.J., Gachabayov, M. & Latifi, R. Biologic Mesh in Surgery: A Comprehensive Review and Meta-Analysis of Selected Outcomes in 51 Studies and 6079 Patients. World J Surg 45, 3524–3540 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-020-05887-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-020-05887-3

Search

Navigation