The Use of Biologic Mesh vs Bioabsorbable Mesh During Ventral Hernia Repair in At-risk Patients

Wake Forest University (WFU) logo

Wake Forest University (WFU)

Status

Terminated

Conditions

Ventral Hernia

Treatments

Device: Strattice Arm
Device: Bio-A Arm

Study type

Interventional

Funder types

Other

Identifiers

NCT01794338
09-12-02A

Details and patient eligibility

About

This study evaluates the outcomes of patients who have been treated with Strattice or Gore Bio-A mesh for the repair of complicated abdominal wall hernias. The purpose of this study is to collect information and evaluate the outcome of your surgery. Synthetic (man made) mesh has been shown to provide durable long-term outcomes; however, this type of mesh should not be used in patients at risk of developing an infection. Therefore, to address the challenge of finding an artificial strengthening material to repair complicated hernias in patients that could potentially develop surgical infection, two types of non-permanent materials have been developed, including biologics and bioabsorbables. Biologic mesh is made of living tissue and bioabsorbable mesh is made of synthetic material that is gradually absorbed by the body over time. The purpose of this study is to allow surgeons to compare the postoperative course of patients associated with these two mesh types to decide which material will improve the outcomes of their patients with complicated abdominal wall defects. To date there is no evidence to suggest that either mesh type is superior or safer than the other.

Full description

The goal of the proposed study is to evaluate the outcomes of patients implanted with Strattice® (LifeCell Corporation, Branchburg, NJ, USA) and Gore® Bio-A® (W. L. Gore & Associates, Inc., Newark, DE, USA) for the repair of abdominal wall defects in at-risk patients. Primary endpoints of the study will include hernia recurrence, duration of postoperative drains, the incidence of systemic and wound-related complications, the need for percutaneous intervention or reoperation and quality- of-life with 3 years of follow-up. The study will be prospective and randomized, and the evaluator and patient will be blinded as to the type of mesh implanted.

Enrollment

28 patients

Sex

All

Ages

18+ years old

Volunteers

No Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion criteria

  • Age 18 or older
  • Grade II or III ventral hernia according to Ventral Hernia Working Group (VHWG)
  • Pre-operative informed consent is obtainable

Exclusion criteria

  • Return to the operating room within the next 1 year for additional open abdominal surgery is anticipated
  • Absence of fascial defect or fascial defect less than 3 cm in greatest dimension
  • Presence of previously place mesh (synthetic or biologic) at the site of surgery, which will not be completely removed and will, in part or whole, remain at the site of implantation of the study mesh
  • Concurrent placement of another mesh (synthetic or biologic) at the site where the study mesh is placed
  • Grade IV ventral hernia according to VHWG system
  • ASA score IV or above
  • Any disease or condition along with the surgeon's clinical judgment that contraindicates the use of either study mesh
  • Pregnancy

Trial design

Primary purpose

Treatment

Allocation

Randomized

Interventional model

Parallel Assignment

Masking

Quadruple Blind

28 participants in 2 patient groups

Bio-A Arm
Experimental group
Description:
Patients will receive underlay mesh tissue reinforcement followed by standard fascial closure with #1 PDS. As described by Dr. Stoppa10-12, the mesh will be secured via abdominal wall sutures. Additional full thickness sutures will be placed every 8 cm circumferentially. After securing the mesh in place, #1 PDS sutures will be used to close the fascia in a running fashion with 1.5-2 cm "bites" from the fascial edge and a 1cm "walk" between stitches. Skin will be closed with staples or monofilament suture according to surgeon preference. Drains will be placed on the mesh in each case, and one or two drains will be placed in the subcutaneous tissues at the discretion of the surgeon depending on the amount of subcutaneous tissue dissected.
Treatment:
Device: Bio-A Arm
Strattice Arm
Active Comparator group
Description:
Patients will receive underlay mesh tissue reinforcement followed by standard fascial closure with #1 PDS. As described by Dr. Stoppa10-12, the mesh will be secured via abdominal wall sutures. Additional full thickness sutures will be placed every 8 cm circumferentially. After securing the mesh in place, #1 PDS sutures will be used to close the fascia in a running fashion with 1.5-2 cm "bites" from the fascial edge and a 1cm "walk" between stitches. Skin will be closed with staples or monofilament suture according to surgeon preference. Drains will be placed on the mesh in each case, and one or two drains will be placed in the subcutaneous tissues at the discretion of the surgeon depending on the amount of subcutaneous tissue dissected..
Treatment:
Device: Strattice Arm

Trial documents
1

Trial contacts and locations

1

Loading...

Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov

Clinical trials

Find clinical trialsTrials by location
© Copyright 2024 Veeva Systems