Comparative Study
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Review
Systematic Review
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the repair of potentially contaminated and contaminated abdominal wall defects.

BACKGROUND: Repair of contaminated abdominal wall defects entails the dilemma of choosing between synthetic material, with its presumed risk of surgical site complications, and biologic material, a costly alternative with questionable durability.

DATA SOURCES: Thirty-two studies published between January 1990 and June 2015 on repair of (potentially) contaminated hernias with ≥25 patients were reviewed. Fifteen studies solely described hernia repair with biologic mesh, 6 nonabsorbable synthetic meshes, and 11 described various techniques. Surgical site complications and hernia recurrence rates were evaluated per degree of contamination and mesh type by calculating pooled proportions.

CONCLUSIONS: Analysis showed no benefit of biologic over synthetic mesh for repair of potentially contaminated hernias with comparable surgical site complication rates and a hernia recurrence rate of 9% for biologic and 9% for synthetic repair. Biologic mesh repair of contaminated defects showed considerable higher rates of surgical site complications and a hernia recurrence rate of 30%. As only 1 study on synthetic repair of contaminated hernias was available, surgical decision making in the approach of contaminated abdominal wall defects is hampered.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app