O'Keefe Thomas J, Perkins Louis A, Guajardo Isabella, Adams Laura M, Cosman Bard C, Ardill William D, Potenza Bruce M
Department of Surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Department of Surgery, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Ann Transl Med. 2025 Apr 30;13(2):15. doi: 10.21037/atm-25-2. Epub 2025 Apr 29.
Most surgeons tie half-hitch knots, but many are unfamiliar with the principles underlying their security leading to insecure knots. When presented with evidence regarding tying technique and knot security, we note a proclivity among surgeons towards resistance to change with rationalizations such as concerns regarding tissue strangulation with increasing knot security. We hypothesize that this concern is unfounded. The aim of this study was to identify whether the impact of loop tautness on knot security is mediated through the configuration of the knot.
Six-throw knots were tied with 0 silk. The loop of the knot encompassed two brass rings and a piece of latex hose. Four knot types were tied and tested: non-taut and taut single post knots (SxSxSxSxSxS in Dinsmore notation), and non-taut and taut alternating post knots (SxSxS#S#S#S in Dinsmore notation). The latex hose was then removed from the loop and the brass rings were distracted on a tensiometer to assess knot security. The main outcome for the study was knot security, including maximum force resisted by each knot type to 1 and 2 mm slippage and ultimate failure defined by slippage to unraveling or breakage of the suture. Differences of means were tested with 2-sided -test.
By 1 mm slippage, the tautly tied alternating post knots were more secure than the single post knots, and the non-taut single post knots were less secure than all other configurations. By 2 mm slippage, the tautly tied alternating post knots were more secure than all other configurations and the non-taut alternating post knots were more secure than the tautly tied and non-taut single post knots. By ultimate failure, the tautly tied and non-taut alternating post knots were comparable and both more secure than both single post knots.
Surgeons can utilize single and alternating post throws to independently confer knot security and loop tautness and thereby tie the knot needed under a given set of circumstances.
大多数外科医生会打半结,但许多人并不熟悉半结安全性背后的原理,导致所打的结不牢固。当面对有关打结技术和结安全性的证据时,我们注意到外科医生倾向于抵制改变,并给出诸如担心随着结安全性增加会导致组织绞窄等理由。我们假设这种担心是没有根据的。本研究的目的是确定环的张力对结安全性的影响是否通过结的构型介导。
用0号丝线打六次结。结的环包含两个黄铜环和一段乳胶软管。打出并测试了四种结类型:非张力和张力单柱结(用丁斯莫尔表示法为SxSxSxSxSxS),以及非张力和张力交替柱结(用丁斯莫尔表示法为SxSxS#S#S#S)。然后将乳胶软管从环中取出,在张力计上拉开黄铜环以评估结的安全性。该研究的主要结果是结的安全性,包括每种结类型抵抗1毫米和2毫米滑动的最大力,以及由滑动至缝线解开或断裂所定义的最终失效。用双侧检验测试均值差异。
在滑动1毫米时,张力交替柱结比单柱结更牢固,而非张力单柱结比所有其他构型都不牢固。在滑动2毫米时,张力交替柱结比所有其他构型更牢固,而非张力交替柱结比张力和非张力单柱结更牢固。在最终失效时,张力和非张力交替柱结相当,且都比两种单柱结更牢固。
外科医生可以利用单柱和交替柱打法来独立赋予结安全性和环的张力,从而在给定的一组情况下打出所需的结。