2017-18 HSC Section 4 Green Book
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery • June 2015
Abdominal Wall Complex abdominal wall defects including large hernias and fistulas remain a significant challenge for the reconstructive surgeon. The use of traditional synthetic materials such as polypro- pylene, polyethylene terephthalate, and polytet- rafluoroethylene has lost favor to the lightweight absorbable or partially absorbable materials that include polyglactin (Vicryl; Ethicon, Inc., Somer- ville, N.J.) or poliglecaprone. 56 Unfortunately, none of these materials is particularly well-suited for abdominal wall reconstruction when dealing with a contaminated field where its removal is required in 50 to 90 percent of cases. 45 In addi- tion, complications are extensive and include the risk of visceral adhesions, fistula formation, infection, seroma, and skin breakdown. 44 In this setting, acellular dermal matrix has emerged as a viable alternative. A group in The Netherlands conducted a systematic review of 25 studies on the use of bio- logical grafts in ventral hernia repair and found that the overall recurrence rate was 13.8 percent and depended on the type of wound; however, that number jumped to 23.1 percent if the bio- logical grafts were placed in a contaminated field. Interestingly, of the 15.9 percent of infected grafts encountered, graft removal was required in only 4.9 percent of the cases. 49 Complications are inevitable when deal- ing with complex and contaminated abdominal wounds. There is wide variation reported in the literature, but in one review comparing the out- comes of different biological meshes, Bellows et al. reported an incidence of at least one compli- cation in 87 percent of cases. Unfortunately, this literature review is limited by the lack of a stan- dardized procedure reporting on studies that used varied techniques, including overlay, underlay, sandwich, bridging, and interposition. The most common complications include infection, seroma formation, recurrence, enterocutaneous fistulas, and dehiscence. 47 Currently, there appears to be a trend toward the use of xenograft (animal-derived matrix) over allograft (human-derived matrix) in various complicated settings, with some sug- gesting an observed decrease in the incidence of recurrence and infection. 46–49 Despite these find- ings, it is evident that randomized, prospective trials are needed to reveal the true benefit of a medical device that costs anywhere from $2845 to $5311 per 150 cm 2 . 49 The most comprehensive studies and reviews to date are all composed of Level III evidence (Table 2). The true integrity of acellular dermal matrix (as opposed to synthetic
Table 2. Relevant Studies by Application and Levels of Evidence
Level of Evidence
Reference Chest wall
IV IV III
Tuggle et al., 2004 20 Von Wattenwyl et al., 2011 21 Lin et al., 2012 22 Rocco et al., 2012 23 Miller et al., 2013 24 Basu et al., 2010 25 Salzberg et al., 2011 26 Hester et al., 2012 30 Kim et al., 2012 31 Ibrahim et al., 2013 32 Cayci et al., 2013 33 Spear et al., 2014 34 Tessler et al., 2014 35 Mesimaki et al., 2009 36 Sherris and Oriel, 2011 37 Meara et al., 2012 38 Shiridharani et al., 2012 39 Yoshioka et al., 2012 40 Jansen and Macadam, 2011 27 Sbitany and Sirletti, 2011 28 Glasberg et al., 2012 29 Gunarajah and Samman, 2013 41
V
III
Breast
III III III III III III III III III IV IV IV IV III III III V III III III III IV IV IV IV IV IV IV V V V IV III V
Craniofacial
Sandor et al., 2013 42 Fulco et al., 2014 43 Leber et al., 1998 44 Cavallaro et al., 2010 45 Beale et al., 2012 46 Bellows et al., 2013 47 Iacco et al., 2013 48 Slater et al., 2013 49 Lattari et al., 1997 9 Tsai et al., 1999 10 Chen et al., 2008 13 Jiong et al., 2010 14 Yim et al., 2010 18 Askari et al., 2011 6 Pan et al., 2011 15 Tang et al., 2011 17 Chen et al., 2012 11 Chen et al., 2013 12 Pirayesh et al., 2014 16 Zhang et al., 2014 19 Brown et al., 2011 51 Schutz et al., 2012 52 Kølle et al., 2013 53 Ozturk et al., 2013 54
Abdominal wall
Dermal substitutes and burn wounds Wainwright, 1995 50
V II II
IV
Cosmetic
I
IV
I
IV
of biocompatible tissue when transferable autol- ogous tissue has been exhausted, improved resistance to infection and increased durability when placed in a contaminated field, 2 and the ability of the tissue to integrate and adapt dur- ing remodeling that occurs during the growth phase. Despite these advantages, acellular der- mal matrix is associated with its own set of com- plications and high costs.
3
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs