| Literature DB >> 19015745 |
Farid Saleh1, Beniamino Palmieri, Danielle Lodi, Khalid Al-Sebeih.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: The increasing number of surgical procedures performed with local anesthesia, followed by immediate patient discharge from the hospital, emphasizes the need for a tight waterproof suture that is capable of maintaining its tensile strength in the postoperative phase when the wound tumescence, edema due to the anesthetic drug, and surgical trauma disappear. Moreover, the issue of having an accurate surgical wound closure is very relevant in vivo in order to prevent hemorrhage and exogenous microbial infections. This study aimed at designing a new a lab technique that could be used for evaluating the best surgical material. Using such a technique, we compared the wound-lip-sealing properties of three commonly-used suture threads, namely polyurethane, polypropylene, and polyamide.Entities:
Keywords: polyamide; polypropylene; polyurethane; suture threads; wound-lip-sealing properties
Mesh:
Year: 2008 PMID: 19015745 PMCID: PMC2583338 DOI: 10.7150/ijms.5.354
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Med Sci ISSN: 1449-1907 Impact factor: 3.738
A summary of the most commonly used sutures.
| Material | Configuration | Tensile strength | Absorption time | Knot | Use |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VICRYL RAPID: glycol and lactide copolimer coated by polyglactin 370 and Ca++ stearate | braided | 45% at 7 days | 50 days | good | Subcutaneous and cutaneous closure, pediatric, and obstetrics-gynecology |
| VICRYL COATED: glycol and lactide copolymer coated by polyglactin 370, 910 and Ca++ stearate | braided | 65% at 14 days | 50-70 days | good | not for tissue continuously stressed |
| MONOCRYL: glycolide and epsilopn caprolacton copolymer | monofilament | 50% at 14 days | 105 days | good | Obstetrics- gynecology, urology, plastic, abdominal, and vascular |
| POLYDIOXANONE: ester polymer | monofilament | 70% at 14 days | 200 days | poor | Abdominal, thoracic, subcutaneous, intestinal, vascular, pediatric, plastic, oncology, orthopedic |
| PANACRYL: glycolide and lactide copolymer coated by caprolactone and glycolide | braided | 80% at 3 months | 18-24 months | good | Tendons, ligaments, and articular capsules |
| SURGICAL GUT (plain) | twisted | poor at 7-10 days | 6-8 weeks | poor | Subcutaneous closure, and closure of punch biopsies |
| SURGICAL GUT (fast-absorbing) | twisted | 50% at 3-5 days | 2-4 weeks | poor | Subcutaneous closure |
| SURGICAL GUT (chromic) | twisted | poor at 21-28 days | 8-10 weeks | poor | Subcutaneous closure, and vessel ligature |
| COTTON | twisted | good | / | good | None |
| SURGERY SILK | braided/twisted | none in 1 years | / | excellent | General, ophthalmic, and plastic surgeries |
| SURGERY STEEL: metallic alloy of steel-nickel-chrome | mono/multifilament | indefinitely | / | poor | Abdominal and cutaneous surgeries, tendon repair, orthopedics, and neurosurgery |
| NYLON: polyamide polymer | monofilament | 20% per years | / | good | Skin closure, blood vessel ligature, and plastic and ophthalmic surgeries |
| NUROLON: polyamide polymer | monofilament | indefinitely | / | good | Skin closure, general, cardiovascular, and plastic surgeries |
| PROLENE: propylene polymer | monofilament | indefinitely | / | good | Skin closure, subcuticular, general, plastic, cardiovascular, and ophthalmic surgeries |
| MESILENE: tereftalic acid and polyethylene polymer | braided | indefinitely | / | very good | Skin closure, general, cardiovascular, and plastic surgeries |
| ETHIBOND EXCEL: tereftalic acid and polyethylene polymer coated by polybutilate | braided | indefinitely | / | very good | Skin closure, general, cardiovascular, and plastic surgeries |
| PROVOVA: polyvildenfluoro-exafluoropropylene polymer | monofilament | indefinitely | / | very good | Skin closure, plastic, ophthalmic, general, cardiovascular, and plastic surgeries |
| NOVARFIL: polybutester polymer | monofilament | indefinitely | / | good | Skin closure |
| POLYURETHANE: polyurethane polymer | monofilament | indefinitely | / | very good | Skin closure, general, cardiovascular, and plastic surgeries |
Comparison of mean tensile strength, elongation, and elasticity coefficient of suture threads on 75 samples of the three different suture materials knot polypropylene, polyamide, and polyurethane. N = Newton, n = total number of samples, SEM = standard error from the mean. The tensile strength is the maximum strength that the suture thread can sustain against force before it breaks. Elongation is the maximum length that the suture thread can reach in association with the tensile strength. The elasticity coefficient reflects the degree of elasticity of the suture thread while reacting to a traction force. *P < 0.05 is considered significant.
| Tensile strength (Mean ± SEM) (N) | Elongation (Mean ± SEM) (cm) | Elasticity coefficient (Mean ± SEM) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16.4 ± 0.78 | 2.48 ± 0.13 | 7.12 ± 0.01 | ||
| 13.7 ± 0.64 | 1.94 ± 0.09 | 1.42 ± 0.05 | ||
| 11.1 ± 0.27 | 1.84 ± 0.10 | 1.13 ± 0.03 | ||
| Polyurethane versus Polypropylene | < 0.0001* | = 0.001* | < 0.0001* | |
| Polypropylene versus Polyamide | = 0.015* | = 0.47 | < 0.0001* | |
| Polyurethane versus Polyamide | = 0.001* | = 0.003* | < 0.0001* | |
Gradual absorption of stain through the three different suture threads examined, as determined by measuring the surface area of the stain at different time intervals (T0 = 0 minute, T2 = 2 minutes, T4 = 4 minutes, T6 = 6 minutes, and T8 = 8 minutes). There was significant difference in the permeability of the stain through the three different suture threads, starting from 2 minutes after the stain was added. n = total number of samples. SEM = standard error from the mean. *P < 0.05 is considered significant.
| Stained Surface Area (Mean ± SEM mm2) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T0 | T2 | T4 | T6 | T8 | ||
| 360 ± 1.4 | 330 ± 0.6 | 270 ± 3.8 | 144 ± 0.7 | 28 ± 1.1 | ||
| 360 ± 2.1 | 300 ± 0.2 | 243 ± 4.1 | 72 ± 0.9 | 9 ± 2.4 | ||
| 360 ± 3.0 | 252 ± 1.7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Polyurethane versus Polypropylene | = 1 | < 0.0001* | < 0.0001* | < 0.0001* | < 0.0001* | |
| Polypropylene versus Polyamide | = 1 | < 0.0001* | < 0.0001* | < 0.0001* | < 0.0001* | |
| Polyurethane versus Polyamide | = 1 | < 0.0001* | < 0.0001* | < 0.0001* | < 0.0001* | |
Figure 1Progressive absorption of the stain through the three different suture threads (polyurethane [A], polypropylene [B], and polyamide [C]), as examined at different time intervals following the addition of the stain (1 = at 0 minute, 2 = at 2 minutes, 3 = at 4 minutes, 4 = at 6 minutes, and 5 = at 8 minutes). It took significantly (P < 0.0001) longer time for the stain to permeate the polyurethane suture threads, followed by polypropylene and polyamide.
Linear skin sutures performed during surgeries on laparocele, hernia, lipoma, and scar revision. Every wound was sutured with three different suture threads (polyurethane, polypropylene, and polyamide), which were placed randomly on the wound line. The size of the scar associated with the usage of the polyurethane suture threads was significantly (P < 0.0001) less than that associated with the usage of the polypropylene and polyamide suture threads. n = total number of cases. SEM = standard error from the mean. *P < 0.05 is considered significant.
| Length of the wound line (Mean ± SEM) (mm) | Width of the scar (Mean ± SEM) (mm) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Laparocele (n = 10) | Hernia (n = 10) | Lipoma (n = 10) | Scar revision (n = 10) | Laparocele (n = 10) | Hernia (n = 10) | Lipoma (n = 10) | Scar Revision (n = 10) | ||
| 300 ± 5 | 150 ± 0.7 | 60 ± 0.5 | 115 ± 1.5 | 0.23 ± 0.01 | 0.15 ± 0.02 | 0.2 ± 0.01 | 0.25 ± 0.03 | ||
| 300 ± 4 | 150 ± 0.8 | 60 ± 0.9 | 115 ± 1 | 2.33 ± 0.4 | 2.55 ± 0.3 | 2.43 ± 0.06 | 2.48 ± 0.06 | ||
| 300 ± 4 | 150 ± 1 | 60 ± 1 | 115 ± 0.9 | 2.35 ± 0.2 | 2.6 ± 0.1 | 2.47 ± 0.09 | 2.5 ± 0.08 | ||
| Polyurethane versus Polypropylene | < 0.0001* | < 0.0001* | < 0.0001* | < 0.0001* | |||||
| Polypropylene versus Polyamide | = 0.96 | = 0.88 | = 0.72 | = 0.84 | |||||
| Polyurethane versus Polyamide | < 0.0001* | < 0.0001* | < 0.0001* | < 0.0001* | |||||
Figure 2Sealing properties of three different suture threads (polyurethane, polypropylene, and polyamide) examined in this study. The first photo shows a skin suture applied following a right subcostal laparocele surgery. Note that the scar in the middle part of the suture line where polyurethane was used is very thin, as compared to wider scars in the lateral segments of the suture line where polyamide (left) and polypropylene (right) were used . The second photo shows a suture line following lipomectomy. Note that the lateral segments of the suture line, which were sutured using polyurethane, do not show any abnormalities, while the central segment, which was sutured using polypropylene and polyamide, shows unfitting margins, bigger scar, and exposure of subcutaneous tissue to infection. The last three photos are derived from the experimental protocol performed on hydrocolloids. Note that only polyurethane, which was used in the middle part of the suture line, was capable of providing a proper sealing of the wound.