Table 1.

Clinical Review Summary

Review Article	Primary Articles Cited	Study Type	Material Used	SSI Rate	Recurrence Rate	Mesh Placement	Follow Up (mean, months)	Correlations
Grey et al, 2008[2]	Kim et al, 2006[22]	Series	Alloderm	41%(12/29)	10% (3/29)	Underlay, CS	6	NR
	Patton et al, 2007[23]	Series	Alloderm	16% (11/67)	18% (12/67)	Inlay, Interposition, Onlay	10.6	Interposition/onlay associated with recurrence
Bachman et al, 2008[6]	Diaz et al, 2006[24]	Series	Alloderm	33% (25/75)	16% (12/75)	Inlay, Interposition, Onlay, CS	9	NR
	Schuster et al, 2006[25]	Series	Alloderm	NR	50% (9/18)	Unclear	9	NR
	Catena et al, 2007[26]	Series	Permacol	0% (0/7)	0% (0/7)	Inlay, Onlay	11	NR
	Ueno et al, 2004[27]	Series	Surgisis	40% (8/20)	6/20 (30%)	Inlay, Onlay	16	NR
	Helton et al, 2005[28]	Series	Surgisis	58% (18/31)	26% (8/31)	Underlay, CS, Inlay	14	Contamination associated with SSI and/or recurrence
	Franklin et al, 2002[29]	Series	Surgisis	5% (1/19)	0% (0/19)	Onlay	15	NR
	Franklin et al, 2004[30]	Series	Surgisis	2% (1/43)	0% (0/43)	Onlay	19	NR
Breuing et al, 2010[7]	Patton et al, 2007[23]; Kim et al, 2006[22]; Diaz et al, 2006[24]	See above	See above	See above	See above	See above	See above	See above
Shankaran et al, 2010[1]	Kim et al, 2006[22]; Patton et al, 2007[23]	See above	See above	See above	See above	See above	See above	See above
	Diaz et al, 2009[31]	Series	Alloderm	40%(96/240)	17% (41/240)	Inlay, Interpositional, Onlay, CS	10	SSI associated with interpositional placement
	Alaedeen et al, 2006[32]	Series	Alloderm, Surgisis	60% (6/10)	20% (2/10)	Interpositional, CS	14	NR
	Parker et al, 2006[33]	Series	Permacol	0% (0/5)	20% (1/5)	Underlay	18	NR
	Bellows et al, 2008[34]	Series	Alloderm	25% (5/20)	30% (6/20)	Underlay	9	Wound class associated with complication

Abbreviations: CS, component separation; NR, not reported; SSI, surgical site infection