Outcomes after abdominal wall reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix: A systematic review

Toni Zhong, Jeffrey E. Janis, Jamil Ahmad, Stefan O P Hofer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

26 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Complex abdominal wall defects can present a significant challenge to the reconstructive surgeon. In 2003, acellular dermal matrix (ADM) was introduced as an alternative to synthetic materials with suggestions that it has improved capacity to integrate with surrounding tissues with less inclination towards infection, erosion, extrusion, adhesion formation and rejection compared with synthetic materials. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate the existing literature describing the use of ADM for abdominal wall reconstruction in an attempt to identify factors that may affect outcomes. Methods: A review of the MEDLINE database using the search terms 'dermal matrix' and 'abdomen' or 'hernia' for prospective and retrospective human studies in English was performed. Exclusion criteria were animal studies, case reports, reviews and articles that dealt only with ADM for repair of congenital abdominal wall defects, hiatal, parastomal or inguinal hernias and enterocutaneous fistulae. Two independent reviewers performed the systematic review with the same a priori criteria, with discrepancies reconciled by the senior author. Results: In October 2010, 3394 articles were identified as potentially inclusive based on the search term 'dermal matrix'. When filtered for 'abdomen' or 'hernia', 83 articles were found. Ultimately, 30 articles met criteria. No other systematic reviews, meta-analyses or randomised controlled trials were identified in the existing literature. Conclusions: At this current time, there is a paucity of high-level evidence comparing ADM with other methods interfering with the ability of physicians to make data-driven recommendations on clinical indications, surgical techniques and outcomes following ADM-assisted abdominal wall reconstruction.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1562-1571
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery
Volume64
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2011

Fingerprint

Acellular Dermis
Abdominal Wall
Hernia
Abdomen
Intestinal Fistula
Skin
Hiatal Hernia
Inguinal Hernia
MEDLINE
Meta-Analysis
Randomized Controlled Trials
Retrospective Studies
Databases
Physicians
Infection

Keywords

  • Abdominal wall reconstruction
  • Acellular dermal matrix
  • AlloDerm
  • Biologic
  • Hernia

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Outcomes after abdominal wall reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix : A systematic review. / Zhong, Toni; Janis, Jeffrey E.; Ahmad, Jamil; Hofer, Stefan O P.

In: Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Vol. 64, No. 12, 12.2011, p. 1562-1571.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Zhong, Toni ; Janis, Jeffrey E. ; Ahmad, Jamil ; Hofer, Stefan O P. / Outcomes after abdominal wall reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix : A systematic review. In: Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery. 2011 ; Vol. 64, No. 12. pp. 1562-1571.
@article{5a5887f289c8499d9bfa1c9db9656fb4,
title = "Outcomes after abdominal wall reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix: A systematic review",
abstract = "Background: Complex abdominal wall defects can present a significant challenge to the reconstructive surgeon. In 2003, acellular dermal matrix (ADM) was introduced as an alternative to synthetic materials with suggestions that it has improved capacity to integrate with surrounding tissues with less inclination towards infection, erosion, extrusion, adhesion formation and rejection compared with synthetic materials. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate the existing literature describing the use of ADM for abdominal wall reconstruction in an attempt to identify factors that may affect outcomes. Methods: A review of the MEDLINE database using the search terms 'dermal matrix' and 'abdomen' or 'hernia' for prospective and retrospective human studies in English was performed. Exclusion criteria were animal studies, case reports, reviews and articles that dealt only with ADM for repair of congenital abdominal wall defects, hiatal, parastomal or inguinal hernias and enterocutaneous fistulae. Two independent reviewers performed the systematic review with the same a priori criteria, with discrepancies reconciled by the senior author. Results: In October 2010, 3394 articles were identified as potentially inclusive based on the search term 'dermal matrix'. When filtered for 'abdomen' or 'hernia', 83 articles were found. Ultimately, 30 articles met criteria. No other systematic reviews, meta-analyses or randomised controlled trials were identified in the existing literature. Conclusions: At this current time, there is a paucity of high-level evidence comparing ADM with other methods interfering with the ability of physicians to make data-driven recommendations on clinical indications, surgical techniques and outcomes following ADM-assisted abdominal wall reconstruction.",
keywords = "Abdominal wall reconstruction, Acellular dermal matrix, AlloDerm, Biologic, Hernia",
author = "Toni Zhong and Janis, {Jeffrey E.} and Jamil Ahmad and Hofer, {Stefan O P}",
year = "2011",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1016/j.bjps.2011.04.035",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "64",
pages = "1562--1571",
journal = "Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery",
issn = "1748-6815",
publisher = "Churchill Livingstone",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Outcomes after abdominal wall reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix

T2 - A systematic review

AU - Zhong, Toni

AU - Janis, Jeffrey E.

AU - Ahmad, Jamil

AU - Hofer, Stefan O P

PY - 2011/12

Y1 - 2011/12

N2 - Background: Complex abdominal wall defects can present a significant challenge to the reconstructive surgeon. In 2003, acellular dermal matrix (ADM) was introduced as an alternative to synthetic materials with suggestions that it has improved capacity to integrate with surrounding tissues with less inclination towards infection, erosion, extrusion, adhesion formation and rejection compared with synthetic materials. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate the existing literature describing the use of ADM for abdominal wall reconstruction in an attempt to identify factors that may affect outcomes. Methods: A review of the MEDLINE database using the search terms 'dermal matrix' and 'abdomen' or 'hernia' for prospective and retrospective human studies in English was performed. Exclusion criteria were animal studies, case reports, reviews and articles that dealt only with ADM for repair of congenital abdominal wall defects, hiatal, parastomal or inguinal hernias and enterocutaneous fistulae. Two independent reviewers performed the systematic review with the same a priori criteria, with discrepancies reconciled by the senior author. Results: In October 2010, 3394 articles were identified as potentially inclusive based on the search term 'dermal matrix'. When filtered for 'abdomen' or 'hernia', 83 articles were found. Ultimately, 30 articles met criteria. No other systematic reviews, meta-analyses or randomised controlled trials were identified in the existing literature. Conclusions: At this current time, there is a paucity of high-level evidence comparing ADM with other methods interfering with the ability of physicians to make data-driven recommendations on clinical indications, surgical techniques and outcomes following ADM-assisted abdominal wall reconstruction.

AB - Background: Complex abdominal wall defects can present a significant challenge to the reconstructive surgeon. In 2003, acellular dermal matrix (ADM) was introduced as an alternative to synthetic materials with suggestions that it has improved capacity to integrate with surrounding tissues with less inclination towards infection, erosion, extrusion, adhesion formation and rejection compared with synthetic materials. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate the existing literature describing the use of ADM for abdominal wall reconstruction in an attempt to identify factors that may affect outcomes. Methods: A review of the MEDLINE database using the search terms 'dermal matrix' and 'abdomen' or 'hernia' for prospective and retrospective human studies in English was performed. Exclusion criteria were animal studies, case reports, reviews and articles that dealt only with ADM for repair of congenital abdominal wall defects, hiatal, parastomal or inguinal hernias and enterocutaneous fistulae. Two independent reviewers performed the systematic review with the same a priori criteria, with discrepancies reconciled by the senior author. Results: In October 2010, 3394 articles were identified as potentially inclusive based on the search term 'dermal matrix'. When filtered for 'abdomen' or 'hernia', 83 articles were found. Ultimately, 30 articles met criteria. No other systematic reviews, meta-analyses or randomised controlled trials were identified in the existing literature. Conclusions: At this current time, there is a paucity of high-level evidence comparing ADM with other methods interfering with the ability of physicians to make data-driven recommendations on clinical indications, surgical techniques and outcomes following ADM-assisted abdominal wall reconstruction.

KW - Abdominal wall reconstruction

KW - Acellular dermal matrix

KW - AlloDerm

KW - Biologic

KW - Hernia

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=81155134683&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=81155134683&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.bjps.2011.04.035

DO - 10.1016/j.bjps.2011.04.035

M3 - Article

C2 - 21624851

AN - SCOPUS:81155134683

VL - 64

SP - 1562

EP - 1571

JO - Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery

JF - Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery

SN - 1748-6815

IS - 12

ER -