离体皮肤闭合模型中倒刺和单丝缝合的生物力学分析。

IF 2 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Jacob G Mabey, Alexander J Kammien, Vikram G Mookerjee, J Grant Thomson
{"title":"离体皮肤闭合模型中倒刺和单丝缝合的生物力学分析。","authors":"Jacob G Mabey, Alexander J Kammien, Vikram G Mookerjee, J Grant Thomson","doi":"10.1007/s00266-025-04947-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Previous studies propose that barbed suture may have equivalent tensile strength and reduced suturing time compared to traditional suture materials, but this has not been tested in skin closure using tissue from living human donors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty-four 5 cm by 2.5 cm samples were cut from twelve skin and subcutaneous tissue specimens that were obtained from abdominal wall procedures. Each sample was sectioned in half, and the skin was then closed using one of two techniques: knotless (running subcuticular with 3-0 barbed suture and skin glue) or layered closure (deep dermal sutures with 3-0 poliglecaprone, running subcuticular with 4-0 poliglecaprone and skin glue). Closure time and load to failure were recorded and compared using t-tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean closure time was significantly shorter for the knotless technique (2.2 ± 0.6 minutes) compared to layered closure (5.6 ± 0.5 minutes). Regarding tensile strength, mean load to failure for the knotless closure (46.5 ± 22.2 N) was significantly lower than the layered closure (79.3 ± 39.1 N). All techniques failed due to suture rupture.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Knotless closures significantly reduced closure time but were weaker than layered closures. All closures exceeded estimates of clinical tension in wound closure, suggesting that knotless skin closures may be a viable option in some scenarios to reduce closure time and suture material.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence iii: </strong>This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .</p>","PeriodicalId":7609,"journal":{"name":"Aesthetic Plastic Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Biomechanical Analysis of Barbed and Monofilament Suture in an Ex Vivo Skin Closure Model.\",\"authors\":\"Jacob G Mabey, Alexander J Kammien, Vikram G Mookerjee, J Grant Thomson\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00266-025-04947-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Previous studies propose that barbed suture may have equivalent tensile strength and reduced suturing time compared to traditional suture materials, but this has not been tested in skin closure using tissue from living human donors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty-four 5 cm by 2.5 cm samples were cut from twelve skin and subcutaneous tissue specimens that were obtained from abdominal wall procedures. Each sample was sectioned in half, and the skin was then closed using one of two techniques: knotless (running subcuticular with 3-0 barbed suture and skin glue) or layered closure (deep dermal sutures with 3-0 poliglecaprone, running subcuticular with 4-0 poliglecaprone and skin glue). Closure time and load to failure were recorded and compared using t-tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean closure time was significantly shorter for the knotless technique (2.2 ± 0.6 minutes) compared to layered closure (5.6 ± 0.5 minutes). Regarding tensile strength, mean load to failure for the knotless closure (46.5 ± 22.2 N) was significantly lower than the layered closure (79.3 ± 39.1 N). All techniques failed due to suture rupture.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Knotless closures significantly reduced closure time but were weaker than layered closures. All closures exceeded estimates of clinical tension in wound closure, suggesting that knotless skin closures may be a viable option in some scenarios to reduce closure time and suture material.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence iii: </strong>This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7609,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Aesthetic Plastic Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Aesthetic Plastic Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-025-04947-0\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aesthetic Plastic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-025-04947-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:先前的研究表明,与传统缝合材料相比,倒刺缝合可能具有相同的抗拉强度和缩短缝合时间,但尚未在使用活体供体组织进行皮肤闭合试验。方法:从12例腹壁手术获得的皮肤和皮下组织标本中切取24例5 × 2.5 cm的标本。每个样本被切成两半,然后使用两种技术中的一种进行皮肤闭合:无结(用3-0的刺缝线和皮肤胶进行皮下缝合)或分层闭合(用3-0的聚甲哌酮进行真皮深层缝合,用4-0的聚甲哌酮和皮肤胶进行皮下缝合)。使用t检验记录和比较关闭时间和负载到故障。结果:无结缝合术的平均缝合时间(2.2±0.6分钟)明显短于分层缝合术(5.6±0.5分钟)。在抗拉强度方面,无结闭合的平均失效载荷(46.5±22.2 N)显著低于分层闭合的平均失效载荷(79.3±39.1 N)。所有技术均因缝线破裂而失败。结论:无结闭合明显缩短闭合时间,但比分层闭合弱。所有闭合都超过了伤口闭合的临床张力估计,这表明在某些情况下,无结皮肤闭合可能是一种可行的选择,以减少闭合时间和缝合材料。证据等级iii:本刊要求作者为每篇文章指定证据等级。有关这些循证医学评级的完整描述,请参阅目录或在线作者说明www.springer.com/00266。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Biomechanical Analysis of Barbed and Monofilament Suture in an Ex Vivo Skin Closure Model.

Background: Previous studies propose that barbed suture may have equivalent tensile strength and reduced suturing time compared to traditional suture materials, but this has not been tested in skin closure using tissue from living human donors.

Methods: Twenty-four 5 cm by 2.5 cm samples were cut from twelve skin and subcutaneous tissue specimens that were obtained from abdominal wall procedures. Each sample was sectioned in half, and the skin was then closed using one of two techniques: knotless (running subcuticular with 3-0 barbed suture and skin glue) or layered closure (deep dermal sutures with 3-0 poliglecaprone, running subcuticular with 4-0 poliglecaprone and skin glue). Closure time and load to failure were recorded and compared using t-tests.

Results: Mean closure time was significantly shorter for the knotless technique (2.2 ± 0.6 minutes) compared to layered closure (5.6 ± 0.5 minutes). Regarding tensile strength, mean load to failure for the knotless closure (46.5 ± 22.2 N) was significantly lower than the layered closure (79.3 ± 39.1 N). All techniques failed due to suture rupture.

Conclusions: Knotless closures significantly reduced closure time but were weaker than layered closures. All closures exceeded estimates of clinical tension in wound closure, suggesting that knotless skin closures may be a viable option in some scenarios to reduce closure time and suture material.

Level of evidence iii: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
25.00%
发文量
479
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery is a publication of the International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery and the official journal of the European Association of Societies of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (EASAPS), Società Italiana di Chirurgia Plastica Ricostruttiva ed Estetica (SICPRE), Vereinigung der Deutschen Aesthetisch Plastischen Chirurgen (VDAPC), the Romanian Aesthetic Surgery Society (RASS), Asociación Española de Cirugía Estética Plástica (AECEP), La Sociedad Argentina de Cirugía Plástica, Estética y Reparadora (SACPER), the Rhinoplasty Society of Europe (RSE), the Iranian Society of Plastic and Aesthetic Surgeons (ISPAS), the Singapore Association of Plastic Surgeons (SAPS), the Australasian Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons (ASAPS), the Egyptian Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (ESPRS), and the Sociedad Chilena de Cirugía Plástica, Reconstructiva y Estética (SCCP). Aesthetic Plastic Surgery provides a forum for original articles advancing the art of aesthetic plastic surgery. Many describe surgical craftsmanship; others deal with complications in surgical procedures and methods by which to treat or avoid them. Coverage includes "second thoughts" on established techniques, which might be abandoned, modified, or improved. Also included are case histories; improvements in surgical instruments, pharmaceuticals, and operating room equipment; and discussions of problems such as the role of psychosocial factors in the doctor-patient and the patient-public interrelationships. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery is covered in Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, SciSearch, Research Alert, Index Medicus-Medline, and Excerpta Medica/Embase.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信