I think that the type of hernia and the results hoped for would play a big part in a decision.
I also think that the quality of the data available for a broad evaluation like that is poor. Most of what has been published over the decades has been inconclusive. For example, a few years ago Ovitex was in the news, with many surgeons promoting it. The company “went public”, meaning that they entered the stock market where investors could buy shares, and now the fanfare has died down. The stock price has dropped and the company is branching out in to other areas. There is no data other than the initial 31 patient inguinal hernia repair study by a single surgeon that suggests that Ovitex is a good idea for inguinal hernia repair.
The new biologic being promoted is Strattice. Similar to the way in which TelaBio created a white paper showing the weaknesses of synthetic mesh, now the Strattice people have produced a paper showing the weaknesses of Ovitex. Most of these “scientific” papers have a corporate purpose behind them.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10029-023-02769-0
Here is a recent short paper (supplement) describing a study comparing synthetic mesh and biologic mesh. In the same person! I don’t know how they convinced these patients to be experimental subjects, but there it is. So far, at 6 months, they see no difference. 6 months is a very short time frame of course.
https://academic.oup.com/bjs/article/110/Supplement_2/znad080.012/7155931
OC-005 COMPARISON OF POSTOPERATIVE PAIN: BIOLOGICAL VERSUS SYNTHETIC MESH SIX MONTHS AFTER LAPAROENDOSCOPIC HERNIA REPAIR – RESULTS OF THE RANDOMIZED, MULTICENTER, SELF-CONTROLLED BIOLAP TRIAL
C S Seefeldt, J Knievel, J Meyer-Zillekens, J Lange, R Lefering, M Heiss
British Journal of Surgery, Volume 110, Issue Supplement_2, May 2023
“… To test the hypothesis that the use of biological meshes results in significantly less pain postoperatively than the use of synthetic meshes, without an increased recurrence rate, patients with bilateral primary inguinal hernias were included. Patients received biological mesh on one side and synthetic mesh on the other. …”