Outcomes of Abdominal Wall Reconstruction with a Bovine versus a Porcine Acellular Dermal Matrix: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Background:Abdominal wall reconstruction (AWR) is one of the most commonly performed procedures, yet large comparative studies comparing outcomes of AWR using bovine acellular dermal matrix (BADM) and porcine acellular dermal matrix (PADM) are lacking.Methods:In this retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent AWR from March of 2005 to June of 2019, the primary comparative outcome measure was hernia recurrence with BADM versus PADM. The secondary outcome was the incidence of surgical-site occurrence (SSO) and surgical-site infection. A propensity score matching approach was applied to compare the clinical outcomes between the two study groups.Results:The authors identified 725 patients who underwent AWR using BADM (50.5%) or PADM (49.5%). Their mean +/- SD age was 59.8 +/- 11.5 years, mean body mass index was 31.4 +/- 6.7 kg/m2, and mean follow-up time was 42 +/- 29 months. With propensity score matching, 219 matched pairs were identified. Hernia recurrence rates in BADM (11.4%) and PADM (13.7%) groups did not differ significantly (P = 0.793). SSO (26.5% versus 29.2%; P = 0.518) and SSI (13.2% versus 11%; P = 0.456) rates did not differ significantly in the PADM and BADM groups, respectively. Conditional logistic regression model and marginal Cox proportional hazards regression model determined that type of acellular dermal matrix was not significantly associated with SSOs (adjusted OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.70; P = 0.589) or hernia recurrence (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.50 to 1.42; P = 0.52).Conclusions:Both BADMs and PADMs provide durable, long-term outcomes. The hernia recurrence and postoperative surgical complication rates were not significantly different between BADM and PADM.CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Therapeutic, III.