Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32970208›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2021

A novel biosynthetic scaffold mesh reinforcement affords the lowest hernia recurrence in the highest-risk patients.

Mitchell J Parker, Rachel C Kim, Martin Barrio, Juan Socas, Lawrence R Reed, Attila Nakeeb, Michael G House, Eugene P Ceppa

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Outcomes of Biosynthetic and Synthetic Mesh in Ventral Hernia Repair.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mitchell J ParkerDepartment of Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, 545 Barnhill Dr., EH541, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA.
Rachel C KimDepartment of Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, 545 Barnhill Dr., EH541, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA.
Martin BarrioDepartment of Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, 545 Barnhill Dr., EH541, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA.
Juan SocasDepartment of Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, 545 Barnhill Dr., EH541, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA.
Lawrence R ReedDepartment of Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, 545 Barnhill Dr., EH541, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA.
Attila NakeebDepartment of Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, 545 Barnhill Dr., EH541, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA.
Michael G HouseDepartment of Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, 545 Barnhill Dr., EH541, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA.
Eugene P CeppaDepartment of Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, 545 Barnhill Dr., EH541, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA. eceppa@iupui.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-8368-2232
Indiana University School of Medicine

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPatients with higher postoperative infection risk undergoing ventral hernia repair (VHR) have limited options for mesh use. Biosynthetic mesh is intended to utilize the durability of synthetic mesh combined with the biocompatibility of biologic mesh. We sought to assess the outcomes of a novel biosynthetic scaffold mesh for VHR in higher risk patients over a 12-month postoperative period.

methodsTwo cohorts of 50 consecutive patients who underwent VHR with TELA Bio OviTex biosynthetic or synthetic mesh were retrospectively compared. Endpoints included surgical site occurrence (SSO), readmission rate, and hernia recurrence following VHR at 12 months postoperatively.

resultsOviTex mesh placement was associated with higher risk Ventral Hernia Working Group (VHWG) distribution and more contaminated CDC wound class distribution compared to synthetic mesh placement (VHWG grade 3: 68% vs. 6%, p < 0.001; CDC class > I: 70% vs. 6%, p < 0.001). Additionally, concomitant procedures were performed more often with OviTex mesh placement than synthetic mesh placement (70% vs 10%, p < 0.001). The OviTex mesh performed comparably to synthetic mesh in terms of incidences of SSO (36% vs 22%, p = 0.19), readmission rates (24% vs 14%, p = 0.31), and hernia recurrence (6% vs 12%, p = 0.74). On further evaluation, patients who developed SSO with OviTex mesh (n = 18) had a 17% hernia recurrence whereas those with synthetic mesh (n = 11) had an associated 55% hernia recurrence (p = 0.048).

conclusionsThe OviTex biosynthetic mesh was used in higher risk patients and performed similarly to synthetic mesh in regards to rate of SSO, readmissions, and hernia recurrence. Furthermore, patients who developed SSO with Ovitex mesh were significantly less likely to have hernia recurrence than those with synthetic mesh. Overall, the data suggest that biosynthetic mesh is a more desirable option for definitive hernia repair in higher risk patients.

Indexed as

Hernia, VentralSurgical MeshHerniorrhaphyHumansRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeBiosynthetic hybrid meshContaminated ventral hernia repairSynthetic meshTELA bio OviTexVentral hernia repair

Identifiers

PMID32970208
OpenAlexW3088680860

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.