A Comparison of Component Separation With Porcine Acellular Dermal Reinforcement to Bovine Acellular Dermal Matrix in the Repair of Significant Midline Ventral Hernia Defects

Background The optimal material for reinforcement of complex abdominal ventral hernia repair (VHR) remains controversial. Biologic prostheses such as porcine and bovine acellular dermal matrix (PADM/BADM) have shown favorable results, but few head-to-head comparisons between the two types exist. We sought to provide such a comparison. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study comparing 40 consecutive patients who underwent open component separation (CS/VHR) with PADM reinforcement to 39 consecutive patients who underwent open CS/VHR with BADM reinforcement at our institution. Patient characteristics, outcomes, complications, reoperations, and hernia recurrences were obtained by chart review. Fisher’s exact and t-test analyses compared patient characteristics and outcomes between the 2 cohorts. Statistical significance was set as P < .05. Results Patient groups did not differ significantly in race (P=.36), age (P=.8), BMI (P=.34), sex (P=.09), steroid usage (p-1.00), COPD (P=.43), number of previous abdominal operations (P=.66), and duration of follow-up (P=.65). There were significantly more smokers in the PADM group (37.5% vs 12.8%, P=.01). Mean defect size was significantly greater in the PADM group (372.5 cm2 vs 292. cm2 in the BADM group, P=.001) as was the number of Ventral Hernia Working Group (VHWG) grade III/IV hernias (65.0% vs 38.4%, P=.02). Recurrence rates were lower in the BADM group, (12.5% vs 5.1%, P=.26), as was recurrence or complications requiring reoperation (17.5% vs 5.1%, P=.15). Postoperative wound events were also significantly lower in the BADM group (30.0% vs 2.6%, P=.001). Conclusions In our series, CS/BADM was associated with significantly fewer wound complications. Recurrences and complications requiring reoperation were also fewer, which trended toward but did not reach statistical significance, presumably due to the small sample size. These findings indicating superiority of BADM over PADM are potentially confounded by the higher percentage of smokers, the larger mean defect size, and the higher number of VHWG III/IV patients in the PADM group. Further prospective study of these findings is warranted.