Giusto Gessica, Caramello Vittorio, Comino Francesco, Gandini Marco
Department of Veterinary Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy, largo P. Braccini 2‑5, 10095 Grugliasco (TO), Italy. E‑mail:
Vet Ital. 2019 Sep 30;55(3):269-274. doi: 10.12834/VetIt.691.3383.2.
In this study the caecum and large colon were harvested from 24 slaughtered horses. On each sample, an 8‑cm long enterotomy was performed. Enterotomies were closed using either barbed or unbarbed glycomer‑631. We compared the time to close, appearance, length of suture material, bursting pressure, and costs associated with each type of material. Our findings demonstrated that time to close was significantly shorter (caecum, P = 0.034; pelvic flexure, P = 0.039) using barbed sutures (caecum 610.4 seconds; pelvic flexure 699.3 seconds) than unbarbed sutures (caecum 661.0 seconds, pelvic flexure 743.1 seconds). The length of suture material used was significantly less (caecum, P < 0.0001; pelvic flexure, P < 0.0001) with barbed (caecum 28.1 cm, pelvic flexure 32.0 cm,) compared with unbarbed sutures (caecum 41.6 cm; pelvic flexure 46.6 cm). There were no significant differences in bursting pressure (caecum, P = 0.294; pelvic flexure, P = 0.430) between barbed (caecum, 172.5 mmHg, pelvic flexure, 188.9 mmHg) and unbarbed sutures (caecum 178.3 mmHg, pelvic flexure 183.3 mmHg). The cost was higher using barbed sutures. However, the use of barbed sutures was faster, left less suture material in the tissue, and sustained comparable bursting pressure to unbarbed sutures. We therefore conclude that barbed sutures are a valid alternative to unbarbed sutures for closing large intestine enterotomy in horses.
在本研究中，从24匹屠宰马身上采集盲肠和大结肠。在每个样本上进行一个8厘米长的肠切开术。使用带倒刺或不带倒刺的聚己内酯-631缝合材料关闭肠切开术。我们比较了关闭时间、外观、缝合材料长度、破裂压力以及与每种材料相关的成本。我们的研究结果表明，使用带倒刺缝线（盲肠610.4秒；骨盆弯曲处699.3秒）关闭的时间明显短于使用不带倒刺缝线（盲肠661.0秒，骨盆弯曲处743.1秒）（盲肠，P = 0.034；骨盆弯曲处，P = 0.039）。与不带倒刺缝线（盲肠41.6厘米；骨盆弯曲处46.6厘米）相比，使用带倒刺缝线（盲肠28.1厘米，骨盆弯曲处32.0厘米）时，所用缝合材料的长度明显更短（盲肠，P < 0.0001；骨盆弯曲处，P < 0.0001）。带倒刺缝线（盲肠172.5 mmHg，骨盆弯曲处188.9 mmHg）和不带倒刺缝线（盲肠178.3 mmHg，骨盆弯曲处183.3 mmHg）之间的破裂压力没有显著差异（盲肠，P = 0.294；骨盆弯曲处，P = 0.430）。使用带倒刺缝线的成本更高。然而，使用带倒刺缝线速度更快，组织中残留的缝合材料更少，并且与不带倒刺缝线的破裂压力相当。因此，我们得出结论，对于马大肠肠切开术的关闭，带倒刺缝线是不带倒刺缝线的有效替代品。
