Sasaki Gordon H, Komorowska-Timek Eva D, Bennett Della C, Gabriel Allen
Loma Linda University Medical Center, Loma Linda, CA, USA.
Aesthet Surg J. 2008 Jul-Aug;28(4):387-96. doi: 10.1016/j.asj.2008.04.001.
In recent years, a number of designed suspension sutures have been rapidly introduced into clinical practice.
This study compares the holding tension, slippage tension, and pull-out tension for each of 8 suspension suture systems randomly positioned in the midface soft tissue in 4 fresh-frozen cadaver heads.
For each suture suspension system, a suture was positioned and set within the soft tissue of the cheek adjacent to the nasolabial line and attached to a tensiometer. A reference point was marked on the skin at the point where the suture first engaged the tissue. Holding tension was defined as the ounces of tension required to obtain a 5-mm superolateral displacement of the reference point. Slippage tension was determined by pulling further until the suture experienced its first slippage. Pull-out tension was defined as the ounces of tension required to pull the entire suture from its exit site. Photomicrographs of the fixation sites on the extracted sutures were examined and compared to their preinsertion state.
Holding tension was statistically higher for the expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) knotted looped suture (W.L. Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, AZ) than for other systems. Slippage tension was greatest for the ePTFE suture; among other sutures, the tension profiles for the Silhouette (Kolster Methods, Inc., Corona, CA) and Woffles suture technique were higher than the others. In 3 of 5 cases, the ePTFE sutures demonstrated the highest pull-out tension, followed by the Silhouette and Woffles sutures. About 50% of barbs or cogs of polypropylene and polydioxanone sutures demonstrated bending, curling, or stripping away from the suture body after extraction. No morphologic flaws were found for suture knots, free-standing cones, or anchor pulleys.
The various suture suspension systems currently available have differing efficacy and safety profiles. The results of this cadaver study clarify our understanding of the safety, benefits, and limitations of these systems. The higher ounces of tension for the ePTFE and Woffles sutures were to be expected, because these systems employ double suture strands that grasp a wider area than single-suture systems. Limitations of the study include the small number of samples, possible departures from clinical technique, and the inherent differences of the elastic and suture-holding properties between fresh-frozen cadaveric versus living tissue.
近年来,一些设计好的悬吊缝线已迅速应用于临床实践。
本研究比较了8种悬吊缝线系统在4个新鲜冷冻尸头的面中部软组织中随机定位后的握持张力、滑动张力和拔出张力。
对于每种缝线悬吊系统,将一根缝线放置并固定在靠近鼻唇线的脸颊软组织内,并连接到张力计上。在缝线首次接触组织的皮肤处标记一个参考点。握持张力定义为使参考点产生5毫米上外侧位移所需的张力盎司数。通过进一步拉动直至缝线首次出现滑动来确定滑动张力。拔出张力定义为将整个缝线从其穿出部位拔出所需的张力盎司数。检查并比较取出的缝线上固定部位的显微照片与其插入前的状态。
膨体聚四氟乙烯(ePTFE)打结环行缝线(W.L. Gore & Associates公司,弗拉格斯塔夫,亚利桑那州)的握持张力在统计学上高于其他系统。ePTFE缝线的滑动张力最大;在其他缝线中,Silhouette(Kolster Methods公司,科罗纳,加利福尼亚州)和Woffles缝线技术的张力曲线高于其他缝线。在5个案例中的3个案例中,ePTFE缝线的拔出张力最高,其次是Silhouette和Woffles缝线。取出后,约50%的聚丙烯和聚二氧六环酮缝线的倒刺或齿出现弯曲、卷曲或从缝线主体剥离。在缝线结、独立锥体或锚定滑轮上未发现形态缺陷。
目前可用的各种缝线悬吊系统具有不同的疗效和安全性。这项尸体研究的结果阐明了我们对这些系统的安全性、益处和局限性的理解。ePTFE和Woffles缝线的张力盎司数较高是可以预期的,因为这些系统采用双股缝线,比单股缝线系统能抓住更宽的区域。该研究的局限性包括样本数量少、可能与临床技术存在差异以及新鲜冷冻尸体组织与活体组织之间弹性和缝线固定特性的固有差异。