The aim of the current prospective study was to evaluate the biomechanical stability of barbed suture vs. conventional suture. Biomechanical stability of a 14x14-cm PDO/polydioxanone, with a half circle and 36-mm needle, bidirectional barbed 0-Quill suture (Angiotech, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada) vs. 1-Poliglecaprone 25 (Monocryl, Ethicon, Inc, Somerville, NJ) suture was evaluated on biological specimens. The 1-Monocryl suture was chosen because it is widely used by gynecological surgeons in the repair either of the vaginal cuff or the uterine wall defects. Forty specimens of aponeurotic muscle, obtained from abdominal wall of a lamb, were prepared, and randomly assigned to 1 of 2 repair groups: Group A (n = 20) classic repair with 1-Monocryl suture; Group B (n = 20) 0-Quill barbed suture. Each specimen was transected at the midpoint and then repaired. Biomechanical stability of the repaired specimen was verified on a CMT6000 electromechanical universal testing machine (SANS, MTS SYSTEMS, China Co., Ltd., Shenzhen, China), with a 1kN cell. Biomechanical tests showed that maximum force was similar for 1-Monocryl and 0-Quill respectively (p = non-significant). This randomized laboratory study shows that biomechanical stability of the sutures is comparable.

Biomechanical Features of Bidirectional-barbed Suture: A Randomized Laboratory Analysis

FRATERNALI, Fernando;
2014

Abstract

The aim of the current prospective study was to evaluate the biomechanical stability of barbed suture vs. conventional suture. Biomechanical stability of a 14x14-cm PDO/polydioxanone, with a half circle and 36-mm needle, bidirectional barbed 0-Quill suture (Angiotech, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada) vs. 1-Poliglecaprone 25 (Monocryl, Ethicon, Inc, Somerville, NJ) suture was evaluated on biological specimens. The 1-Monocryl suture was chosen because it is widely used by gynecological surgeons in the repair either of the vaginal cuff or the uterine wall defects. Forty specimens of aponeurotic muscle, obtained from abdominal wall of a lamb, were prepared, and randomly assigned to 1 of 2 repair groups: Group A (n = 20) classic repair with 1-Monocryl suture; Group B (n = 20) 0-Quill barbed suture. Each specimen was transected at the midpoint and then repaired. Biomechanical stability of the repaired specimen was verified on a CMT6000 electromechanical universal testing machine (SANS, MTS SYSTEMS, China Co., Ltd., Shenzhen, China), with a 1kN cell. Biomechanical tests showed that maximum force was similar for 1-Monocryl and 0-Quill respectively (p = non-significant). This randomized laboratory study shows that biomechanical stability of the sutures is comparable.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11386/4518258
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 3
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact