Randomized clinical trial comparing polypropylene or polydioxanone for midline abdominal wall closure

Background: Incisional hernia is a frequent complication of abdominal surgery, often requiring surgical intervention. This prospective randomized trial compared suture materials for closure of the fascia after abdominal surgery. Methods: In 456 patients the abdominal fascia was closed with either non‐absorbable (polypropylene; Prolene®) or absorbable (polydioxanone; PDS®) suture material. Follow‐up was by clinical examination and ultrasonography at 6‐month intervals. Outcome measures were incisional hernia, surgical‐site infection and suture sinus. Results: Some 223 patients were analysed after closure with Prolene® and 233 after PDS®. Median follow‐up was 32 and 31 months respectively. There was no significant difference in the incidence of incisional hernia between the groups: 20·2 per cent (45 of 223) for Prolene® and 24·9 per cent (58 of 233) with PDS® (P = 0·229). Kaplan‐Meier analysis showed a cumulative rate after 4 years of 23·7 and 30·2 per cent for Prolene® and PDS® respectively (P = 0·222). Secondary outcome measures showed no significant differences. Conclusion: The incidence of incisional hernia in both groups was higher than expected from previous literature. There were no significant differences between the two suture methods. Registration number: ISRCTN65599814 (http://www.clinical‐trials.com). Copyright © 2011 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Hernias common, but equal