Rashid Rashid M, Sartori Mark, White Lucile E, Villa Mark T, Yoo Simon S, Alam Murad
Division of Dermatology, Stritch School of Medicine, Loyola University, Maywood, Illinois, USA.
Arch Dermatol. 2007 Jul;143(7):869-72. doi: 10.1001/archderm.143.7.869.
To assess the strength of 2.0 barbed polypropylene suture, and, specifically, to determine the load required to break this suture, and to compare this with the strength of nonbarbed polypropylene suture.
Rater-blinded, controlled trial. The individual responsible for setting up the experimental conditions was not blinded.
Biomechanics laboratory in an academic medical center.
This study did not include human subjects. Materials used included six 2.0 barbed polypropylene sutures and 3 each of 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, and 5.0 nonbarbed polypropylene sutures. Each suture was randomly selected from a different batch or box of similar sutures.
Each suture was strung between 2 (top and bottom) cylinders and tied with a surgeon's knot. A tensile testing device was used to apply increasing force until the suture broke. Data were acquired through an analog-to-digital board on an IBM-compatible computer using commercially available software.
Ultimate strength, stiffness, and elongation before suture rupture.
Strength of the barbed sutures (mean [SD] ultimate strength, 39.5 [9.0] N) was intermediate between that of 2.0 (55.0 N) and 3.0 (36.4 N) nonbarbed sutures and was not significantly different from that of 3.0 nonbarbed sutures (P = .5). Barbed 2.0 polypropylene sutures differed significantly (P < .001) from each of the other types of nonbarbed sutures on measures of stiffness and elongation. Elongation of barbed sutures was closest to that of 3.0 nonbarbed sutures (P = .002). Stiffness of the barbed sutures (mean [SD], 4.7 [0.7] N/mm) was markedly in excess of that of any of the other suture types (P < .001).
Barbed 2.0 polypropylene sutures seem to be at least as strong as 3.0 nonbarbed polypropylene sutures. As such, barbed sutures are significantly stronger than their rated strength, which has been stated as comparable to 4.0 nonbarbed sutures. This has implications for the long-term in vivo safety of barbed sutures.
评估2.0倒刺聚丙烯缝线的强度,具体而言,确定使该缝线断裂所需的负荷,并将其与无倒刺聚丙烯缝线的强度进行比较。
评估者盲法对照试验。负责设置实验条件的人员未设盲。
一所学术医疗中心的生物力学实验室。
本研究未纳入人体受试者。使用的材料包括6根2.0倒刺聚丙烯缝线以及3根2.0、3.0、4.0和5.0的无倒刺聚丙烯缝线。每根缝线均从不同批次或盒中类似的缝线中随机选取。
将每根缝线穿在2个(顶部和底部)圆柱体之间,并用外科结系紧。使用拉伸测试装置施加逐渐增加的力,直至缝线断裂。通过IBM兼容计算机上的模数转换板,使用商用软件获取数据。
缝线断裂前的极限强度、刚度和伸长率。
倒刺缝线的强度(平均[标准差]极限强度,39.5[9.0]N)介于2.0(55.0N)和3.0(36.4N)无倒刺缝线之间,与3.0无倒刺缝线的强度无显著差异(P = 0.5)。2.0倒刺聚丙烯缝线在刚度和伸长率方面与其他类型的无倒刺缝线均有显著差异(P < 0.001)。倒刺缝线的伸长率最接近3.0无倒刺缝线(P = 0.002)。倒刺缝线的刚度(平均[标准差],4.7[0.7]N/mm)明显超过其他任何缝线类型(P < 0.001)。
2.0倒刺聚丙烯缝线似乎至少与3.0无倒刺聚丙烯缝线一样坚固。因此,倒刺缝线明显强于其额定强度,其额定强度曾被表述为与4.0无倒刺缝线相当。这对倒刺缝线的长期体内安全性具有重要意义。