Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2024 Dec 12;29(1):43.
doi: 10.1007/s10029-024-03239-x.

Synthetic vs. biologic mesh for abdominal wall reconstruction in contaminated surgical fields. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies

Maximos Frountzas  1 , Despoina Kanata  2 , Eirini Solia  2 , Dimitra Smerdi  2 , Christina Nikolaou  3 , Alexandros Chamzin  2 , Dimitrios Linardoutsos  2 , Dimitrios Theodorou  2 , Konstantinos G Toutouzas  2 , Grigorios Chatzimavroudis  4 , Dimitrios Schizas  5
Affiliations
Review

Synthetic vs. biologic mesh for abdominal wall reconstruction in contaminated surgical fields. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies

Maximos Frountzas et al. Hernia. .

Abstract

Purpose: Biologic meshes had been the first choice for abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) in contaminated surgical fields. However, due to increased cost and questioned effectiveness, synthetic meshes have been also implemented. The aim of the present meta-analysis was to compare synthetic and biologic mesh in terms of recurrence and postoperative outcomes.

Methods: The present meta-analysis was designed using the PRISMA guidelines. A search in Medline, Scopus, EMBASE, Clinicaltrials.gov, Google Scholar and Cochrane CENTRAL was conducted from inception until September 2024. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies which compared the use of biologic and synthetic mesh for AWR in contaminated surgical fields were included. Data were extracted by two experienced researchers in pre-defined electronic forms. Pooled odds ratios (OR) and mean differences (MD) were calculated using a random-effects model. Included RCTs were assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 (RoB2) tool and non-randomized trials with the Risk of Bias in non-Randomized Trials (RoBINS-I) tool.

Results: Overall 11 studies were included which enrolled 1,945 patients. Subgroup analysis of RCTs indicated significantly lower recurrence rates for synthetic compared to biologic mesh (p < 0.0001) with a similar follow-up (p = 0.07). Nevertheless, no difference was demonstrated in surgical site infection (SSI) rates. Although synthetic mesh was associated with shorter length of stay, the other postoperative outcomes (surgical site occurrences, mesh infections, readmissions, reoperations) were similar among the two groups.

Conclusion: Synthetic mesh should be considered as a safe and effective option for abdominal wall reconstruction in contaminated surgical fields compared to biologic mesh. Nevertheless, future research is expected to investigate cost-effectiveness of biosynthetic meshes, as alternative option in such surgical fields.

Keywords: Biologic; Contaminated; Field; Mesh; Synthetic.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Conflict of interest: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

References

    1. Le Huu Nho R, Mege D, Fau - Ouaïssi M, Ouaïssi M, Fau - Sielezneff I, Sielezneff I, Fau - Sastre B, Sastre B (2012) Incidence and prevention of ventral incisional hernia. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2012.05.004
    1. Breuing K, Butler CE, Ferzoco S, Franz M, Hultman CS, Kilbridge JF et al (2010) Incisional ventral hernias: review of the literature and recommendations regarding the grading and technique of repair. Surgery 148(3):544–558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2010.01.008 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Onyekwelu I, Yakkanti R, Protzer L, Pinkston CM, Tucker C, Seligson D (2017) Surgical Wound classification and Surgical Site infections in the Orthopaedic Patient. J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev 1(3):e022. https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-17-00022 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
    1. Choi JJ, Palaniappa Nc Fau - Dallas KB, Dallas Kb Fau - Rudich TB, Rudich Tb Fau - Colon MJ, Colon Mj Fau - Divino CM, Divino CM (2012) Use of mesh during ventral hernia repair in clean-contaminated and contaminated cases: outcomes of 33,832 cases. Annals of Surgery 255(1), 176–180 https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e31822518e6
    1. Burger JW, Luijendijk Rw Fau -, Hop WCJ, Hop Wc Fau -, Halm JA, Halm Ja Fau - Verdaasdonk EGG, Verdaasdonk Eg Fau - Jeekel J, Jeekel J (2004) Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia. Annals of surgery 240(4), 578–585. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000141193.08524.e7

LinkOut - more resources