Literature DB >> 23001414

Strength of round and uterosacral ligaments: a biomechanical study.

Pedro Martins1, Agnaldo Lopes Silva-Filho, Andrea M R M Fonseca, Agostinho Santos, Liliana Santos, Teresa Mascarenhas, Renato M N Jorge, António M Ferreira.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To investigate the tensile biomechanical properties of round and uterosacral ligaments.
METHODS: Tissue samples were obtained from 15 female cadavers without pelvic organ prolapse. Uniaxial tensile tests were performed to obtain stiffness and maximum stress of round and uterosacral ligaments. Correlations were calculated using the Pearson correlation coefficient. Statistical differences between groups were tested using Student's paired and unpaired t test.
RESULTS: There was a great variability in the measurements of stiffness and maximum stress in pelvic ligaments. The round ligaments demonstrated stiffness of 9.1 ± 1.6 MPa (mean ± SEM) (ranging from 2 to 25.6 MPa) and maximum stress of 4.3 ± 0.7 MPa (ranging from 1.2 to 11.5 MPa). The stiffness of the uterosacral ligaments was 14.1 ± 1.4 MPa (ranging from 5.7 to 26.1 MPa) with maximum stress of 6.3 ± 0.8 MPa (ranging from 2.2 to 11.9 MPa). There was a strong positive correlation between stiffness and maximum stress in female pelvic ligaments (ρ = 0.851; p < 0.001). The uterosacral ligaments demonstrated higher stiffness and maximum stress compared to the round ligaments (p = 0.006 and p = 0.034; respectively). Age, body mass index and menopausal status were not associated with the biomechanical proprieties of round and uterosacral ligaments. Nulliparous women had lower uterosacral stiffness (15.5 ± 1.3 vs. 10 ± 1.8 MPa; p = 0.033) and maximum stress (8.2 ± 0.9 vs. 4.2 ± 1.1 MPa; p = 0.028) compared to parous women.
CONCLUSION: The uterosacral ligaments are significantly more resistant than round ligaments. Parturition seems to enhance the stiffness and maximum stress of the ligaments.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23001414     DOI: 10.1007/s00404-012-2564-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet        ISSN: 0932-0067            Impact factor:   2.344


  8 in total

Review 1.  Female pelvic floor biomechanics: bridging the gap.

Authors:  Deanna C Easley; Steven D Abramowitch; Pamela A Moalli
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 2.309

2.  Mechanical Analysis of the Uterosacral Ligament: Swine vs. Human.

Authors:  Adwoa Baah-Dwomoh; Marianna Alperin; Mark Cook; Raffaella De Vita
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2018-07-26       Impact factor: 3.934

3.  In vivo properties of uterine suspensory tissue in pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  Jiajia Luo; Tovia M Smith; James A Ashton-Miller; John O L DeLancey
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 2.097

4.  Comparative histology of mouse, rat, and human pelvic ligaments.

Authors:  Ritsuko Iwanaga; David J Orlicky; Jameson Arnett; Marsha K Guess; K Joseph Hurt; Kathleen A Connell
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2016-04-18       Impact factor: 2.894

5.  Expression changes in pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review and in silico study.

Authors:  Maryam B Khadzhieva; Dmitry S Kolobkov; Svetlana V Kamoeva; Lyubov E Salnikova
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-08-09       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Comparison of Biaxial Biomechanical Properties of Post-menopausal Human Prolapsed and Non-prolapsed Uterosacral Ligament.

Authors:  Elvis K Danso; Jason D Schuster; Isabella Johnson; Emily W Harville; Lyndsey R Buckner; Laurephile Desrosiers; Leise R Knoepp; Kristin S Miller
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-04-30       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Investigating the birth-related caudal maternal pelvic floor muscle injury: The consequences of low cycle fatigue damage.

Authors:  M C P Vila Pouca; M P L Parente; R M Natal Jorge; J A Ashton-Miller
Journal:  J Mech Behav Biomed Mater       Date:  2020-07-09

8.  Quantifying Cell-Derived Changes in Collagen Synthesis, Alignment, and Mechanics in a 3D Connective Tissue Model.

Authors:  Benjamin T Wilks; Elisabeth B Evans; Andrew Howes; Caitlin M Hopkins; Morcos N Nakhla; Geoffrey Williams; Jeffrey R Morgan
Journal:  Adv Sci (Weinh)       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 16.806

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.