Cargando…
Tacks vs. sutures: a biomechanical analysis of sacral bony fixation methods for laparoscopic apical fixations in the porcine model
PURPOSE: There is a novel surgical procedure, called cervicosacropexy (CESA) and vaginosacropexy (VASA) to treat pelvic organ prolapse and a concomitant urgency and mixed urinary incontinence. As there is little experience with the tapes so far and literature is scanty, the aim of this study was to...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8918131/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34842976 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00404-021-06343-w |
_version_ | 1784668669591158784 |
---|---|
author | Jansen, Alina Katharina Ludwig, Sebastian Malter, Wolfram Sauerwald, Axel Hachenberg, Jens Pahmeyer, Caroline Wegmann, Kilian Rudroff, Claudia Karapanos, Leonidas Radosa, Julia Trageser, Nadja Eichler, Christian |
author_facet | Jansen, Alina Katharina Ludwig, Sebastian Malter, Wolfram Sauerwald, Axel Hachenberg, Jens Pahmeyer, Caroline Wegmann, Kilian Rudroff, Claudia Karapanos, Leonidas Radosa, Julia Trageser, Nadja Eichler, Christian |
author_sort | Jansen, Alina Katharina |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: There is a novel surgical procedure, called cervicosacropexy (CESA) and vaginosacropexy (VASA) to treat pelvic organ prolapse and a concomitant urgency and mixed urinary incontinence. As there is little experience with the tapes so far and literature is scanty, the aim of this study was to investigate biomechanical properties for the fixation of the PVDF-tapes with three different fixation methods in context of apical fixations. METHODS: Evaluation was performed on porcine, fresh cadaver sacral spines. A total of 40 trials, divided into 4 subgroups, was performed on the anterior longitudinal ligament. Recorded biomechanical properties were displacement at failure, maximum load and stiffness in terms of the primary endpoints. The failure mode was a secondary endpoint. Group 4 was a reference group to compare single sutures on porcine tissue with those on human tissue. Biomechanical parameters for single sutures on the human anterior longitudinal ligament were evaluated in a previous work by Hachenberg et al. RESULTS: The maximum load for group 1 (two single sutures) was 65 ± 12 N, for group 2 (three titanium tacks arranged in a row) it was 25 ± 10 N and for group 3 (three titanium tacks arranged in a triangle) it was 38 ± 12 N. There was a significant difference between all three groups. The most common failure mode was a “mesh failure” in 9/10 trials for groups 1–3. CONCLUSION: The PVDF-tape fixation with two single sutures endures 2.6 times more load than titanium tacks arranged in a row and 1.7 times more load than titanium tacks arranged in a triangle. The presacral fixation with titanium tacks reduced surgical time compared to the fixation with sutures, nevertheless sutures represent the significantly stronger and cheaper fixation method. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8918131 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89181312022-03-17 Tacks vs. sutures: a biomechanical analysis of sacral bony fixation methods for laparoscopic apical fixations in the porcine model Jansen, Alina Katharina Ludwig, Sebastian Malter, Wolfram Sauerwald, Axel Hachenberg, Jens Pahmeyer, Caroline Wegmann, Kilian Rudroff, Claudia Karapanos, Leonidas Radosa, Julia Trageser, Nadja Eichler, Christian Arch Gynecol Obstet General Gynecology PURPOSE: There is a novel surgical procedure, called cervicosacropexy (CESA) and vaginosacropexy (VASA) to treat pelvic organ prolapse and a concomitant urgency and mixed urinary incontinence. As there is little experience with the tapes so far and literature is scanty, the aim of this study was to investigate biomechanical properties for the fixation of the PVDF-tapes with three different fixation methods in context of apical fixations. METHODS: Evaluation was performed on porcine, fresh cadaver sacral spines. A total of 40 trials, divided into 4 subgroups, was performed on the anterior longitudinal ligament. Recorded biomechanical properties were displacement at failure, maximum load and stiffness in terms of the primary endpoints. The failure mode was a secondary endpoint. Group 4 was a reference group to compare single sutures on porcine tissue with those on human tissue. Biomechanical parameters for single sutures on the human anterior longitudinal ligament were evaluated in a previous work by Hachenberg et al. RESULTS: The maximum load for group 1 (two single sutures) was 65 ± 12 N, for group 2 (three titanium tacks arranged in a row) it was 25 ± 10 N and for group 3 (three titanium tacks arranged in a triangle) it was 38 ± 12 N. There was a significant difference between all three groups. The most common failure mode was a “mesh failure” in 9/10 trials for groups 1–3. CONCLUSION: The PVDF-tape fixation with two single sutures endures 2.6 times more load than titanium tacks arranged in a row and 1.7 times more load than titanium tacks arranged in a triangle. The presacral fixation with titanium tacks reduced surgical time compared to the fixation with sutures, nevertheless sutures represent the significantly stronger and cheaper fixation method. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-11-29 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC8918131/ /pubmed/34842976 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00404-021-06343-w Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | General Gynecology Jansen, Alina Katharina Ludwig, Sebastian Malter, Wolfram Sauerwald, Axel Hachenberg, Jens Pahmeyer, Caroline Wegmann, Kilian Rudroff, Claudia Karapanos, Leonidas Radosa, Julia Trageser, Nadja Eichler, Christian Tacks vs. sutures: a biomechanical analysis of sacral bony fixation methods for laparoscopic apical fixations in the porcine model |
title | Tacks vs. sutures: a biomechanical analysis of sacral bony fixation methods for laparoscopic apical fixations in the porcine model |
title_full | Tacks vs. sutures: a biomechanical analysis of sacral bony fixation methods for laparoscopic apical fixations in the porcine model |
title_fullStr | Tacks vs. sutures: a biomechanical analysis of sacral bony fixation methods for laparoscopic apical fixations in the porcine model |
title_full_unstemmed | Tacks vs. sutures: a biomechanical analysis of sacral bony fixation methods for laparoscopic apical fixations in the porcine model |
title_short | Tacks vs. sutures: a biomechanical analysis of sacral bony fixation methods for laparoscopic apical fixations in the porcine model |
title_sort | tacks vs. sutures: a biomechanical analysis of sacral bony fixation methods for laparoscopic apical fixations in the porcine model |
topic | General Gynecology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8918131/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34842976 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00404-021-06343-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jansenalinakatharina tacksvssuturesabiomechanicalanalysisofsacralbonyfixationmethodsforlaparoscopicapicalfixationsintheporcinemodel AT ludwigsebastian tacksvssuturesabiomechanicalanalysisofsacralbonyfixationmethodsforlaparoscopicapicalfixationsintheporcinemodel AT malterwolfram tacksvssuturesabiomechanicalanalysisofsacralbonyfixationmethodsforlaparoscopicapicalfixationsintheporcinemodel AT sauerwaldaxel tacksvssuturesabiomechanicalanalysisofsacralbonyfixationmethodsforlaparoscopicapicalfixationsintheporcinemodel AT hachenbergjens tacksvssuturesabiomechanicalanalysisofsacralbonyfixationmethodsforlaparoscopicapicalfixationsintheporcinemodel AT pahmeyercaroline tacksvssuturesabiomechanicalanalysisofsacralbonyfixationmethodsforlaparoscopicapicalfixationsintheporcinemodel AT wegmannkilian tacksvssuturesabiomechanicalanalysisofsacralbonyfixationmethodsforlaparoscopicapicalfixationsintheporcinemodel AT rudroffclaudia tacksvssuturesabiomechanicalanalysisofsacralbonyfixationmethodsforlaparoscopicapicalfixationsintheporcinemodel AT karapanosleonidas tacksvssuturesabiomechanicalanalysisofsacralbonyfixationmethodsforlaparoscopicapicalfixationsintheporcinemodel AT radosajulia tacksvssuturesabiomechanicalanalysisofsacralbonyfixationmethodsforlaparoscopicapicalfixationsintheporcinemodel AT tragesernadja tacksvssuturesabiomechanicalanalysisofsacralbonyfixationmethodsforlaparoscopicapicalfixationsintheporcinemodel AT eichlerchristian tacksvssuturesabiomechanicalanalysisofsacralbonyfixationmethodsforlaparoscopicapicalfixationsintheporcinemodel |