ArticleHernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery2026
PVDF versus polypropylene large pore mesh for open incisional hernia repair - a case control matched analysis.
Article in Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSeveral types of compound plastics are used in the fabrication of surgical mesh, influencing the specific tissue response to mesh fibers and thus the suitability of the mesh. Experimental data suggests that polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) seems more resistant to hydrolysis and degradation compared to polyethylene-terephthalate (PET) or polypropylene (PP) and there might be an improved biocompatibility compared to PP, while ageing does not increase stiffness. Although PVDF has been introduced in abdominal wall repair since years, the clinical data for its use in retromuscular ventral and incisional hernia repair are scarce, as are data on outcome after longterm follow-up.
methodsPatients having an open, elective incisional hernia repair at our tertiary academic center from 2014 to 2021, with retromuscular implantation of a large-pore PP mesh (n = 108, PP-group) and 109 patients using a large-pore PVDF mesh (PVDF-group) were matched based on BMI, number of comorbidities, number of risk factors and hernia width resulting in a total of 98 matched patients. Four years follow-up and complications from Clavien-Dindo class IIIa on were collected according to the EHS guidelines. (Trial number: B670201734087)
resultsIn the matched cohort, 77.6% of patients in the PVDF-group and 79.6% in the PP-group had no grade IIIa to IVb complications during the total follow-up time (p = 0.806). 16.3% of the patients in both the PVDF-group and the PP-group had a SSO. Only 2% in the PP-group versus 4.1% of the patients in the PVDF-group had a SSI (p = 1.00). The most observed complication was seroma with an overall prevalence in 8.2% of patients in both the PVDF-group and PP-group. After 4 years of follow-up only 1 patient with PVDF-mesh had a hernia recurrence requiring surgical intervention, appearing within one month after hospital discharge.
conclusionPVDF meshes show both long-term safety and efficacy. Considering recurrence rate and complications requiring surgical interventions, large pore PVDF-meshes as well as PP-meshes show excellent results. Mostly, hernia size and extensive surgical dissection seem to influence complication rate. Future research should focus more on patient reported outcomes, quality of life and pain scores by large multi-center trials or registry data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41995883What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.