Cargando…

Barbed suture vs conventional tenorrhaphy: biomechanical analysis in an animal model

BACKGROUND: The advantages of barbed suture for tendon repair could be to eliminate the need for a knot and to better distribute the load throughout the tendon so as to reduce the deformation at the repair site. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the breaking force and the repair site deforma...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Clemente, A., Bergamin, F., Surace, C., Lepore, E., Pugno, N.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4559542/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25628013
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10195-014-0333-8
_version_ 1782388789547630592
author Clemente, A.
Bergamin, F.
Surace, C.
Lepore, E.
Pugno, N.
author_facet Clemente, A.
Bergamin, F.
Surace, C.
Lepore, E.
Pugno, N.
author_sort Clemente, A.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The advantages of barbed suture for tendon repair could be to eliminate the need for a knot and to better distribute the load throughout the tendon so as to reduce the deformation at the repair site. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the breaking force and the repair site deformation of a new barbed tenorrhaphy technique in an animal model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty porcine flexor tendons were divided randomly into three groups and repaired with one of the following techniques: a new 4-strand barbed technique using 2/0 polypropylene Quill™ SRS or 2/0 polydioxanone Quill™ SRS and a modified Kessler technique using 3/0 prolene. All tendons underwent mechanical testing to assess the 2-mm gap formation force, the breaking force and the mode of failure. The percentage change in tendon cross-sectional area before and after repair was calculated. RESULTS: The two-sample Student t-test demonstrated a significant increase in 2-mm gap formation force and in breaking force with barbed sutures, independently from suture material, when compared to traditional Kessler suture. Concerning the tendon profile, we registered less bunching at the repair site in the two barbed groups compared with the Kessler group. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the promising results achieved in previous ex vivo studies about the use of barbed suture in flexor tendon repair. In our animal model, tenorrhaphy with Quill™ SRS suture guarantees a breaking force of repair that exceeds the 40–50 N suggested as sufficient to initiate early active motion, and a smoother profile at the repair site. Level of evidence Not applicable.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4559542
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45595422015-09-10 Barbed suture vs conventional tenorrhaphy: biomechanical analysis in an animal model Clemente, A. Bergamin, F. Surace, C. Lepore, E. Pugno, N. J Orthop Traumatol Original Article BACKGROUND: The advantages of barbed suture for tendon repair could be to eliminate the need for a knot and to better distribute the load throughout the tendon so as to reduce the deformation at the repair site. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the breaking force and the repair site deformation of a new barbed tenorrhaphy technique in an animal model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty porcine flexor tendons were divided randomly into three groups and repaired with one of the following techniques: a new 4-strand barbed technique using 2/0 polypropylene Quill™ SRS or 2/0 polydioxanone Quill™ SRS and a modified Kessler technique using 3/0 prolene. All tendons underwent mechanical testing to assess the 2-mm gap formation force, the breaking force and the mode of failure. The percentage change in tendon cross-sectional area before and after repair was calculated. RESULTS: The two-sample Student t-test demonstrated a significant increase in 2-mm gap formation force and in breaking force with barbed sutures, independently from suture material, when compared to traditional Kessler suture. Concerning the tendon profile, we registered less bunching at the repair site in the two barbed groups compared with the Kessler group. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the promising results achieved in previous ex vivo studies about the use of barbed suture in flexor tendon repair. In our animal model, tenorrhaphy with Quill™ SRS suture guarantees a breaking force of repair that exceeds the 40–50 N suggested as sufficient to initiate early active motion, and a smoother profile at the repair site. Level of evidence Not applicable. Springer International Publishing 2015-01-28 2015-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4559542/ /pubmed/25628013 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10195-014-0333-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2015 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Clemente, A.
Bergamin, F.
Surace, C.
Lepore, E.
Pugno, N.
Barbed suture vs conventional tenorrhaphy: biomechanical analysis in an animal model
title Barbed suture vs conventional tenorrhaphy: biomechanical analysis in an animal model
title_full Barbed suture vs conventional tenorrhaphy: biomechanical analysis in an animal model
title_fullStr Barbed suture vs conventional tenorrhaphy: biomechanical analysis in an animal model
title_full_unstemmed Barbed suture vs conventional tenorrhaphy: biomechanical analysis in an animal model
title_short Barbed suture vs conventional tenorrhaphy: biomechanical analysis in an animal model
title_sort barbed suture vs conventional tenorrhaphy: biomechanical analysis in an animal model
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4559542/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25628013
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10195-014-0333-8
work_keys_str_mv AT clementea barbedsuturevsconventionaltenorrhaphybiomechanicalanalysisinananimalmodel
AT bergaminf barbedsuturevsconventionaltenorrhaphybiomechanicalanalysisinananimalmodel
AT suracec barbedsuturevsconventionaltenorrhaphybiomechanicalanalysisinananimalmodel
AT leporee barbedsuturevsconventionaltenorrhaphybiomechanicalanalysisinananimalmodel
AT pugnon barbedsuturevsconventionaltenorrhaphybiomechanicalanalysisinananimalmodel