Table 4.

Study characteristics and recurrence rates of studies excluded from systematic review

Reference	Year	No. of patients	Material used	Type of repair	No. of wound complications (%)b	Recurrence (%)	Follow-up (range)
Kish et al.22	2005	3	Alloderm	Onlay	n/a	1 (33.3)	(6–12)
Inan18	2007	2	Permacol	Laparoscopic (method not specified)	n/a	0 (0)	6 (3–9)
Greenstein & Aldoroty19	2008	1	Collamend	Retromuscular/sublay	0 (0)	0 (0)	18
Franklin et al.20	2008	2	Surgisis	Intraperitoneal onlay mesh (Laparoscopic)	n/a	0 (0)	n/a
Lo Menzo et al.21	2008	1	Veritas	Intraperitoneal (Laparoscopic Sugarbaker)	1 (100)	0 (0)	17
Loganathan et al.23	2010	3	Permacol	n/a	2 (66)	1 (33)	12 (3–62)a

^aThis follow-up is that of a larger group of which these patients were part of

^bComplications: seroma formation (1),21 ischaemic ileostomy and subsequent fistula (1),23 fistula (1)23