• Skip to main content
  • Skip to header right navigation
  • Skip to site footer

Log in
  • Search
    • Search All SAGES Content
    • Search SAGES Guidelines
    • Search the Video Library
    • Search the Image Library
    • Search the Abstracts Archive
www.sages.org

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • Search
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2026 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • MIS Fellows Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
  • Opportunities
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs and Humanitarian Efforts
  • OWLS/FLS
You are here: Home / Abstracts / A Comparison of Ventral Hernia Outcomes with Poly-4-Hydroxybutyrate, Synthetic and Biologic Mesh

A Comparison of Ventral Hernia Outcomes with Poly-4-Hydroxybutyrate, Synthetic and Biologic Mesh

Margaret A Plymale, DNP, RN, Daniel L Davenport, PhD, Adam Dugan, MS, Amanda Zachem, BSN, RN, John S Roth, MD. University of Kentucky

Introduction: Mesh repair of ventral and incisional hernia is known to be associated with superior outcomes compared with suture repair; however, wound complications and mesh infection have been associated with synthetic mesh, and biologic mesh is thought to be associated with higher risk of hernia recurrence. Evolution of mesh material has made available a biologically-derived fully resorbable poly-4-hydroxybutyrate (P4HB) mesh for use in ventral and incisional hernia repair (VIHR). This study evaluates outcomes of patients undergoing VIHR with P4HB and compares outcomes to patients who have undergone repair with synthetic or biologic mesh.

Methods and Procedures: An IRB-approved single institution prospective study was conducted to assess clinical and quality of life (QOL) outcomes for patients undergoing VIHR with P4HB. Clinical outcomes, employment status, QOL (using Short Form 12), and pain assessments were followed for 24 months postoperatively. Surgical databases from a six-year period of time were reviewed to identify matched patients that had undergone hernia repair with biologic mesh, and similarly a matched cohort of patients that underwent VIHR with synthetic mesh. Perioperative characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared by mesh type.

Results: 126 patients underwent VIHR: 31 with bioresorbable, 44 with biologic, and 51 with synthetic mesh. Patient mesh type groups were similar in age (median 55 years, p = .66), BMI (median 34 kg/m2, p = .10), gender (62% female, p = .71), wound class and comorbidities. Surgical site occurrences were more prevalent among patients with biologic mesh (46%) than synthetic (31%) or bioresorbable (19%), p = 0.006. Hernia recurrence rates were 0% in bioresorbable mesh (median follow up = 414 days), 8% for synthetic mesh (median follow up of 121 days), and18% for biologic mesh (median follow up of 439 days), (p = .02). Patients with bioresorbable mesh had improved QOL scores at 24 months compared to baseline for SF 12 physical component summary and role emotional (p < .05).

Conclusions: Ventral hernia repair with P4HB bioresorbable mesh results in fewer surgical site occurrences than hernia repairs with synthetic or biologic mesh. Hernia recurrence rates differ between biologic, synthetic and bioresorbable mesh with highest recurrence rates occurring in biologic mesh repairs. Quality of life improvements were noted at 24 months for the patients with bioresorbable mesh.


Presented at the SAGES 2017 Annual Meeting in Houston, TX.

Abstract ID: 80060

Program Number: S056

Presentation Session: Ventral Hernias

Presentation Type: Podium

72

Share this:

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window) Pocket
  • Click to share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
  • Click to share on Threads (Opens in new window) Threads
  • Click to share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky

Related


sages_adbutler_leaderboard

Hours & Info

11300 West Olympic Blvd, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90064

1-310-437-0544

[email protected]

Monday – Friday
8am to 5pm Pacific Time

Find Us Around the Web!

  • Bluesky
  • X
  • Instagram
  • Facebook
  • YouTube

Copyright © 2025 · SAGES · All Rights Reserved

Important Links

Healthy Sooner: Patient Information

SAGES Guidelines, Statements, & Standards of Practice

SAGES Manuals