Porcine dermal collagen (Permacol) for abdominal wall reconstruction.

OBJECTIVE: A review of Eisenhower Army Medical Center's experience using Permacol (Tissue Science Laboratories, Covington, Georgia) for the repair of abdominal wall defects. METHODS: Retrospective review of medical records of patients undergoing abdominal wall reconstruction with Permacol. RESULTS: From July 30, 2003 to February 12, 2005, 9 patients underwent repair of complicated fascial defects with Permacol. Indications for surgery included reoperative incisional hernia repair after removal of a infected mesh (3 patients), reconstruction of a fascial defect after resection of an abdominal wall tumor (2 patients), incisional hernia repair in a patient with a previous abdominal wall infection after a primary incisional hernia repair (1 patient), incisional hernia repair in a patient with an ostomy and an open midline wound (1 patient), emergent repair of incisional hernia with strangulated bowel and multiple intra-abdominal abscesses (1 patient), and excision of infected mesh and drainage of intra-abdominal abscess with synchronous repair of the abdominal wall defect (1 patient). At a median follow-up of 18.2 months, 1 recurrent hernia existed after intentional removal of the Permacol. This patient developed an abdominal wall abscess 7 months after hernia repair secondary to erosion from a suture. Overall, 1 patient developed exposure of the Permacol after a skin dehiscence. The wound was treated with local wound care, and the Permacol was salvaged. Despite the presence of contamination (wound classification II, III, or IV) in 5 of 9 patients (56%), no infectious complications occurred. CONCLUSION: Complex reconstruction of the abdominal wall can be associated with a high complication rate. Placement of a permanent prosthetic mesh in a contaminated field is associated with a high rate of wound infections and subsequent mesh removal. Permacol becomes incorporated by tissue ingrowth and neovascularization. Permacol is a safe and acceptable alternative to prosthetic mesh in the repair of complicated abdominal wall defects.

Subcuticular closure versus Dermabond: a prospective randomized trial.

2-Octylcyanoacrylate tissue adhesive (Dermabond, Ethicon, Inc, Somerville, NJ) is being used successfully for closure of minor lacerations. To date, however, there have been no studies evaluating its use in the operating room for surgical incisions. We conducted a prospective randomized trial to compare the closure of inguinal herniorrhaphy incisions using 2-octylcyanoacrylate tissue adhesive (Dermabond) with closures using 4-0 Monocryl (Ethicon, Inc) in a running subcuticular closure. A total of 46 incisions were randomized at the time of closure. Of these incisions 24 were randomized to Dermabond closure (TA) and 22 were randomized to subcuticular closure (SC). Performance measures included: time for closure, wound complications, and cosmesis. Cosmesis was evaluated by blinded evaluation of photographs of the incisions taken 4 weeks after surgery. Closure times for the TA group were faster than in the SC group (mean of 155 vs 286 seconds; P < 0.001). Wound complications were higher in the TA group (P = 0.045). Cosmesis was also felt to be better in the SC group with a score of 4.2 versus 3.88, but this did not reach statistical significance. Although the use of Dermabond did result in faster wound cultures it also resulted in an increase in wound complications. The difference in mean cosmetic score for each group was not statistically significant but trended toward better scores in the SC group. Based on these findings we do not feel Dermabond is an acceptable alternative to subcuticular suture closure in inguinal herniorrhaphy incisions.