Comparative study of biological versus synthetic prostheses in the treatment of ventral hernias classified as grade II/III by the Ventral Hernia Working Group.

Abstract

The implantation of biological prostheses in an at-risk environment has seen increasing use. Their markedly higher cost compared to synthetic prostheses makes it important to analyse their usefulness in terms of actual benefit and cost-effectiveness. This study aims to examine the relevance of bioprostheses during surgical repair of Grade II/III ventral hernias as classified by the Ventral hernia working group (VHWG). This study analysed the data of 119 patients requiring non-emergency repair of VHWG II/III grade hernias between 2010 and 2017. The results of patients who were treated with a bioprosthesis (n=59) were compared to those receiving a synthetic prosthesis (n=60). The primary outcome was surgical site infection (SSI) at 90 days. The secondary endpoints were hernia recurrence rate, cost of the prosthesis, duration of hospital stay and re-hospitalisation rate. The two groups were shown to be comparable by analysis of demographic, pre- and intraoperative data. The SSI rate was significantly higher in the bioprosthesis group (20% vs. 7%; P=0.010), as was the recurrence rate (56% vs. 28%; P=0.003) with a median follow-up of 40 months. The cost of the bioprosthesis was significantly higher than that of the synthetic prosthesis (€3363 vs. €249; P<0.010). In this retrospective study, the use of a bioprosthesis for repair of VHWG II/III ventral hernias was associated with a higher rate of both SSI and hernia recurrence at a cost 13 times greater than the use of a synthetic prosthesis.