BACKGROUND: The suture holding capacity, suture retention strength, and burst strength of three biomaterials (Marlex), SIS, and PeriGuard) were evaluated to compare their performance characteristics in an ex vivo setting representing the immediate postoperative period. MATERIAL/ METHODS: A circular defect was created in the fascial tissue of the abdominal aponeurosis collected from normal dogs. Defects were repaired with either Marlex (polypropylene mesh), Periguard (bovine pericardium) or small intestinal submucosa (SIS) using 2-0 prolene and a 1.0-cm suture bite. The force required to induce failure at the repair site was recorded as the suture-holding capacity. Suture retention strength was calculated as the load distribution over the specimen cross-section in contact with the suture at the time of rupture. Burst strength of the raw materials was also measured. RESULTS: The suture-holding capacity was 370.9+/-56.2 N for Marlex; 214.3+/-36.1 N for Periguard, and 287.9+/-34.3 N for SIS. The suture retention strengths were: Marlex, 413.4+/-59.7 N/mm2; Periguard, 97.0+/-20.1 N/mm2; and SIS, 106.9+/-12.7 N/mm2. The burst strength of Marlex, Periguard and SIS were 476.7+/-50.8 N, 432.12+/-82.1 N, and 433.6+/-79.5 N respectively. CONCLUSIONS: All three materials provide adequate strength and suture-holding capacities to be of use in the repair of soft tissue defects.
BACKGROUND: The suture holding capacity, suture retention strength, and burst strength of three biomaterials (Marlex), SIS, and PeriGuard) were evaluated to compare their performance characteristics in an ex vivo setting representing the immediate postoperative period. MATERIAL/ METHODS: A circular defect was created in the fascial tissue of the abdominal aponeurosis collected from normal dogs. Defects were repaired with either Marlex (polypropylene mesh), Periguard (bovine pericardium) or small intestinal submucosa (SIS) using 2-0 prolene and a 1.0-cm suture bite. The force required to induce failure at the repair site was recorded as the suture-holding capacity. Suture retention strength was calculated as the load distribution over the specimen cross-section in contact with the suture at the time of rupture. Burst strength of the raw materials was also measured. RESULTS: The suture-holding capacity was 370.9+/-56.2 N for Marlex; 214.3+/-36.1 N for Periguard, and 287.9+/-34.3 N for SIS. The suture retention strengths were: Marlex, 413.4+/-59.7 N/mm2; Periguard, 97.0+/-20.1 N/mm2; and SIS, 106.9+/-12.7 N/mm2. The burst strength of Marlex, Periguard and SIS were 476.7+/-50.8 N, 432.12+/-82.1 N, and 433.6+/-79.5 N respectively. CONCLUSIONS: All three materials provide adequate strength and suture-holding capacities to be of use in the repair of soft tissue defects.
Authors: Xin Li; Yuanyuan Guo; Kenneth R Ziegler; Lynn S Model; Sammy D D Eghbalieh; Robert A Brenes; Susun T Kim; Chang Shu; Alan Dardik Journal: Ann Vasc Surg Date: 2011-01-28 Impact factor: 1.466
Authors: Mary E Tedder; Jun Liao; Benjamin Weed; Christopher Stabler; Henry Zhang; Agneta Simionescu; Dan T Simionescu Journal: Tissue Eng Part A Date: 2009-06 Impact factor: 3.845
Authors: Tanchen Ren; Anne Faust; Yolandi van der Merwe; Bo Xiao; Scott Johnson; Apoorva Kandakatla; Vijay S Gorantla; Stephen F Badylak; Kia M Washington; Michael B Steketee Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2018-03-14 Impact factor: 4.379