Elias Polykandriotis1,2, Florian Ruppe2, Miriam Niederkorn3, Ektor Polykandriotis4, Lars Bräuer5, Raymund E Horch1, Andreas Arkudas1, Jasmin S Gruener6. 1. Department of Plastic and Hand Surgery, Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg FAU, University of Erlangen Medical Center, Krankenhausstr. 12, 91054, Erlangen, Germany. 2. Department of Plastic, Hand and Microsurgery, Sana Hospital Hof, Hof, Germany. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, County Hospital Muenchberg, Muenchberg, Germany. 4. Ross University School of Medicine, Miramar, FL, USA. 5. Institute of Anatomy, Chair II; Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg FAU, Erlangen, Germany. 6. Department of Plastic and Hand Surgery, Friedrich Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg FAU, University of Erlangen Medical Center, Krankenhausstr. 12, 91054, Erlangen, Germany. jasmin.gruener@uk-erlangen.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In this study, we evaluate the value of novel suture material based on monofilamentous-extruded polyfluoroethylene (PTFE) compared to polypropylene (PPL) and Fiberwire (FW). MATERIALS AND METHODS: 60 flexor tendons were harvested from fresh cadaveric upper extremities. 4-0 sutures strands were used in the PPL, FW and PTFE group. Knotting properties and mechanical characteristics of the suture materials were evaluated. A 4-strand locked cruciate (Adelaide) or a 6-strand (M-Tang) suture technique was applied as core sutures for a tendon repair. Two-way ANOVA tests were performed with the Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: Stable knotting was achieved with 5 throws with the PPL material, 7 throws for FW and 9 throws for PTFE. In the PPL group, linear tensile strength was 45.92 ± 12.53 N, in the FW group 80.11 ± 18.34 N and in the PTFE group 76.16 ± 29.10 N. FW and PTFE are significantly stronger than PPL but show no significant difference among each other. Similar results were obtained in the subgroup comparisons for different repair techniques. The Adelaide and the M-Tang knotting technique showed no significant difference. CONCLUSION: Fiberwire showed superior handling and knotting properties in comparison to PTFE. However, PTFE allows easier approximation of the stumps. In both, M-Tang and Adelaide repairs, PTFE was equal to FW in terms of repair strength. Both PTFE and FW provide for a robust tendon repair so that early active motion regimens for rehabilitation can be applied.
BACKGROUND: In this study, we evaluate the value of novel suture material based on monofilamentous-extruded polyfluoroethylene (PTFE) compared to polypropylene (PPL) and Fiberwire (FW). MATERIALS AND METHODS: 60 flexor tendons were harvested from fresh cadaveric upper extremities. 4-0 sutures strands were used in the PPL, FW and PTFE group. Knotting properties and mechanical characteristics of the suture materials were evaluated. A 4-strand locked cruciate (Adelaide) or a 6-strand (M-Tang) suture technique was applied as core sutures for a tendon repair. Two-way ANOVA tests were performed with the Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: Stable knotting was achieved with 5 throws with the PPL material, 7 throws for FW and 9 throws for PTFE. In the PPL group, linear tensile strength was 45.92 ± 12.53 N, in the FW group 80.11 ± 18.34 N and in the PTFE group 76.16 ± 29.10 N. FW and PTFE are significantly stronger than PPL but show no significant difference among each other. Similar results were obtained in the subgroup comparisons for different repair techniques. The Adelaide and the M-Tang knotting technique showed no significant difference. CONCLUSION: Fiberwire showed superior handling and knotting properties in comparison to PTFE. However, PTFE allows easier approximation of the stumps. In both, M-Tang and Adelaide repairs, PTFE was equal to FW in terms of repair strength. Both PTFE and FW provide for a robust tendon repair so that early active motion regimens for rehabilitation can be applied.
Authors: Daniel W Dudenhöffer; Matthias W Laschke; Christian Giebels; Irem Karliova; Ulrich Schneider; Michael D Menger; Hans-Joachim Schäfers Journal: Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2018-11-20 Impact factor: 1.827
Authors: Phuoc Thien Phan; Trung Thien Hoang; Mai Thanh Thai; Harrison Low; James Davies; Nigel H Lovell; Thanh Nho Do Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-11-17 Impact factor: 4.379