Melman Lora, Jenkins Eric D, Deeken Corey R, Brodt Michael D, Brown Shaun R, Brunt L Michael, Eagon J Christopher, Frisella Margaret, Matthews Brent D
Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Surg Innov. 2010 Dec;17(4):285-90. doi: 10.1177/1553350610379427. Epub 2010 Sep 3.
The purpose of this comparative study is to evaluate the acute fixation strength of mechanical tacking devices and fibrin sealant against polypropylene suture for laparoscopic ventral hernia repair.
Three metallic mechanical tacking devices (ProTack, Salute, EndoANCHOR), 4 absorbable tacking devices (AbsorbaTack, PermaSorb, I-Clip, and SorbaFix), and 2 types of fibrin sealant (Tisseel, Artiss) were compared with 0-polypropylene suture. Three constructs from each device or an amount of sealant sufficient to cover a 3 × 3 cm(2) area were used to affix a 4 × 3 cm piece of absorbable barrier-coated mesh (Proceed, Ethicon, Inc) to the peritoneal surface of porcine abdominal wall. Ten samples were completed for each fixation modality. Acute fixation strength was measured via a lap shear test on an Instron tensiometer.
Acute fixation strength was significantly greater for suture (59.7 7.2 N) compared with all laparoscopic tacking devices and to fibrin sealant (P < .001 for all comparisons). Protack (29.5 ± 2.8 N) was stronger than Absorbatack (13.2 ± 3.7 N; P = .029). Protack, Permasorb, SorbaFix, and I-clip were stronger than fibrin sealant (P < .05 for all comparisons).
The acute fixation strengths of metallic or absorbable tacks as well as fibrin sealant are all significantly less than that achieved with polypropylene suture. These factors should be considered in selecting the type of mechanical fixation for patients undergoing laparoscopic ventral hernia repair.
本比较研究的目的是评估用于腹腔镜腹疝修补术的机械钉合装置和纤维蛋白密封剂相对于聚丙烯缝线的急性固定强度。
将三种金属机械钉合装置(ProTack、Salute、EndoANCHOR)、四种可吸收钉合装置(AbsorbaTack、PermaSorb、I-Clip和SorbaFix)以及两种类型的纤维蛋白密封剂(Tisseel、Artiss)与0号聚丙烯缝线进行比较。使用每种装置的三个结构或足以覆盖3×3 cm²面积的密封剂用量,将一块4×3 cm的可吸收屏障涂层网片(Proceed,Ethicon公司)固定在猪腹壁的腹膜表面。每种固定方式完成10个样本。通过在Instron张力计上进行搭接剪切试验来测量急性固定强度。
与所有腹腔镜钉合装置和纤维蛋白密封剂相比,缝线的急性固定强度显著更高(59.7±7.2 N)(所有比较P <.001)。ProTack(29.5±2.8 N)比Absorbatack(13.2±3.7 N;P = 0.029)更强。ProTack、Permasorb、SorbaFix和I-clip比纤维蛋白密封剂更强(所有比较P <.05)。
金属或可吸收钉以及纤维蛋白密封剂的急性固定强度均显著低于聚丙烯缝线。对于接受腹腔镜腹疝修补术的患者,在选择机械固定类型时应考虑这些因素。