Alloderm and Cortiva Have Similar Perioperative Wound Complications in Abdominal Wall Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND

Although controversial, the use of acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) for abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) is increasing. There are now many different ADMs available, but there is a lack of studies directly comparing ADMs in terms of outcomes.

MATERIALS AND

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed to compare perioperative wound complications (up to 120 d postoperatively) between patients who underwent AWR with the human noncrosslinked ADMs Alloderm or Cortiva from January 2012 to March 2020. Surgical technique uniformly consisted of open component separation, onlay implantation of ADM, and progressive tension suture fixation of ADM.

RESULTS

After exclusions, 53 patients were in the Alloderm group, and 29 patients were in the Cortiva group. The overall perioperative wound complication rate between Alloderm (51.92%) and Cortiva (72.41%) was not significantly different (P = 0.09921). The average follow-up for Alloderm was 76.69 ± 29.52 d and for Cortiva was 66.93 ± 35.16 d (P = 0.2088). There were no cases that required explantation of ADM.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the similar perioperative wound complication profiles, the more cost-effective ADM may be a consideration for use in AWR. The fact that there were zero instances of ADM explantation also supports the use of ADM in these high-risk cases.