Biological meshes: A review of their use in abdominal wall hernia repairs

Smart, Neil J.; Marshall, MJ; Daniels, Ian R.

doi:10.1016/j.surge.2012.02.006

Cited by 119 publications

(136 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

131

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Alloderm is more expensive (36) and, in general, human dermal meshes have a higher recurrence rate than xenogenics (37). The porcine dermis collagens have a slightly better side effect profile than Alloderm and Surgisis, demonstrated by lower rates of seroma formation, lower total surgical morbidity (38), lower failure rates, and longer (134) time to failure in contaminated or infected fields (39). Porcine materials are easier to manufacture than allomatrices: they can be harvested in larger and more consistent sheets, and harvesting conditions can be better controlled.…”

Section: Classes Of Meshmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surgical mesh for ventral incisional hernia repairs:Understanding mesh design

Rastegarpour¹,

Cheung²,

Vardhan³

2016

J Plastic Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Classes Of Meshmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surgical mesh for ventral incisional hernia repairs:Understanding mesh design

Rastegarpour¹,

Cheung²,

Vardhan³

2016

J Plastic Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…1,4,9 The prosthesis used in the present case (Permacol, Covidien) is a porcine-derived acellular dermal mesh, predominantly composed of type I collagen. 6 After cell removal, it is sterilized by gamma irradiation and packaged in a hydrated state that makes it usable immediately without any preparation. 8 This prosthesis is treated with hexamethylene diisocyanate to increase collagen cross-linking and decrease biodegradability, which might be accelerated in contaminated wounds.…”

Section: Umit Ozcelik Et Al/experimental and Clinical Transplantationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2 Several types of prosthetic mesh currently are available for hernia repair. 6 Although permanent mesh prostheses are considered the best treatment for minimizing hernia recurrence, they have been associated with a high risk of complications due to their nonabsorbable characteristics such as erosion into the abdominal viscera, protrusion, extrusion, adhesion, infection, and bowel fistulae that can lead to more complex and costly surgery. 7 Biological mesh was introduced as an alternative to synthetic mesh in the 1990s.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…7 Biological mesh was introduced as an alternative to synthetic mesh in the 1990s. 6 There are 15 different bioprosthetic materials taken from different types of tissue. 7 Biological mesh prostheses allow neovascularization and regeneration due to infiltration of native fibroblasts and they are incorporated into the surrounding tissue.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…7 Biological mesh prostheses allow neovascularization and regeneration due to infiltration of native fibroblasts and they are incorporated into the surrounding tissue. 6,8 During incorporation, they gradually are degraded and generate a new, metabolically active neofascia to withstand the mechanical forces of the abdominal wall. 7,8 The use of synthetic mesh in transplant patients is controversial.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Untitled

2015

Exp Clin Transplant

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The use of synthetic mesh in transplant patients is controversial. Recent studies have shown that biological prostheses have a greater ability to integrate into tissues, resist bacterial colonization, and reduce cytotoxic or allergic reactions, and provide similar functional results, compared with synthetic prostheses. Biological prostheses do not require any reduction or discontinuation of immunosuppressive therapy. We present the case of a kidney and pancreas transplant recipient who had a giant incisional hernia that was treated successfully with a biological prosthesis. Case Report: A 40-year-old male kidney and pancreas transplant recipient was admitted to our hospital with a giant incisional hernia, 2 years after transplant. The defect on the abdominal wall was 40 × 30 cm. We used 2 biological prostheses (40 × 20 cm and 30 × 20 cm) to close the abdominal wall. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 5 without complications. An abdominal magnetic resonance imaging scan showed complete integrity of the biological prostheses at 1 year after surgery. Conclusions: Transplant recipients have higher risks with use of synthetic prostheses because of being immunosuppressed, compared with other patients. Recent studies show that biological prostheses provided similar functional results without complications compared with synthetic prostheses. These prostheses are versatile and do not require any changes in immunosuppressive therapy. Therefore, they seem to be a better option than synthetic prostheses. In our opinion, biological prostheses are more safe, effective, and reliable than synthetic prostheses, especially for large incisional hernias in transplant recipients. We believe that further larger studies can support our opinion.

show abstract