P Wilhelm1, P Storz, S Axt, C Falch, A Kirschniak, S Muller. 1. Working Group for Surgical Technology and Training, Clinic for General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Tübingen University Hospital, Waldhörnlestrasse 22, 72072, Tübingen, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of self-retaining barbed sutures in comparison with monofilament clip-fixated sutures for rectal wall closure in transanal endoscopic microsurgery. METHODS: Horizontal full-thickness wall defects (3.5 cm) of cattle rectal specimens were closed via transanal endoscopic microsurgery using a monofilament suture with clips at the end (Surgipro(®) 2/0; Covidien, Mansfield, MA, USA, n = 25) or a self-retaining barbed suture (V-Loc™ 180 3/0; Covidien, Mansfield, MA, USA, n = 25). The primary endpoint was the pneumatic leakage pressure of the suture line. As a secondary endpoint, suture time was evaluated. RESULTS: The median pneumatic leakage pressure for barbed sutures was 45.5 mbar (range 17-106 mbar) and 33.5 mbar (range 19-106 mbar) for monofilament sutures (p = 0.58). A pneumatic leak at a critical pressure below 25 mbar occurred in 3 cases with barbed sutures and in 7 cases with monofilament sutures (p = 0.29). Median suturing time [19:25 min:s (range 12:00-33:30) vs. 20:41 (17:00-28:33), p = 0.23] did not differ between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Barbed sutures display the same bursting pressure as monofilament sutures and their use for rectal wall closure seems feasible.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of self-retaining barbed sutures in comparison with monofilament clip-fixated sutures for rectal wall closure in transanal endoscopic microsurgery. METHODS: Horizontal full-thickness wall defects (3.5 cm) of cattle rectal specimens were closed via transanal endoscopic microsurgery using a monofilament suture with clips at the end (Surgipro(®) 2/0; Covidien, Mansfield, MA, USA, n = 25) or a self-retaining barbed suture (V-Loc™ 180 3/0; Covidien, Mansfield, MA, USA, n = 25). The primary endpoint was the pneumatic leakage pressure of the suture line. As a secondary endpoint, suture time was evaluated. RESULTS: The median pneumatic leakage pressure for barbed sutures was 45.5 mbar (range 17-106 mbar) and 33.5 mbar (range 19-106 mbar) for monofilament sutures (p = 0.58). A pneumatic leak at a critical pressure below 25 mbar occurred in 3 cases with barbed sutures and in 7 cases with monofilament sutures (p = 0.29). Median suturing time [19:25 min:s (range 12:00-33:30) vs. 20:41 (17:00-28:33), p = 0.23] did not differ between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Barbed sutures display the same bursting pressure as monofilament sutures and their use for rectal wall closure seems feasible.
Authors: Marco Milone; Matteo Nicola Dario Di Minno; Giuseppe Galloro; Paola Maietta; Paolo Bianco; Francesco Milone; Mario Musella Journal: J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A Date: 2013-07-16 Impact factor: 1.878
Authors: Renée M Barendse; Marcel G Dijkgraaf; Ursula R Rolf; Arnold B Bijnen; Esther C J Consten; Christiaan Hoff; Evelien Dekker; Paul Fockens; Willem A Bemelman; Eelco J R de Graaf Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-04-10 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Françoise I Bussière; Rupesh Chaturvedi; Yulan Cheng; Alain P Gobert; Mohammad Asim; Darren R Blumberg; Hangxiu Xu; Preston Y Kim; Amy Hacker; Robert A Casero; Keith T Wilson Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2004-11-17 Impact factor: 5.157