额上睑下垂硅胶吊带固定方法的体外生物力学比较。

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Ziki Gurney, Meydan Ben Ishai, Chris Schulz, Saul Rajak
{"title":"额上睑下垂硅胶吊带固定方法的体外生物力学比较。","authors":"Ziki Gurney, Meydan Ben Ishai, Chris Schulz, Saul Rajak","doi":"10.1097/IOP.0000000000003073","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>In silicone sling frontalis suspension surgery, the sling is secured by passing both ends through a tight sleeve. Slippage of the silicone sling through the sleeve is likely a major reason for surgical failure. This ex vivo study compared different securing methods to improve the security of the sling in the sleeve.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This quantitative laboratory study compared 6 methods of securing the sling and sleeve to the control: 1) sutures to join the sleeve and sling, 2) 2-throw and 3) 3-throw square knots with the sling, 4) ligaclips, 5) cyanoacrylate surgical glue, and 6) a heat-shrink polyolefin sleeve. Tensile strength in Newtons (N) was measured to determine the force required to either initiate tail slippage or cause complete breakage of the silicone sling.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The securing methods, ranked by tensile strength, were: 3-throw square knot (4.3 N ±0.3), 2-throw square knot (3.7 N ±0.4), sutures (2.7 N ±0.5), ligaclips (1.3 N ±0.3), heat-shrink (1.1 N ±0.4), glue (0.6 N ±0.1), and control (0.2 N ±0.0). All methods, except glue, were significantly more effective than the control group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Multiple methods can greatly improve the security of the sling within the sleeve in these laboratory tests. However, further in vivo exploration is needed to assess other factors such as biocompatibility, risk of extrusion, adjustability, and prominence under the brow. The aim is to develop a quick and easy method to apply while allowing for safe removal or loosening to adjust lid height without introducing additional risks.</p>","PeriodicalId":19588,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ex Vivo Biomechanical Comparison of Silicone Sling Securing Methods for Frontalis Ptosis Repair.\",\"authors\":\"Ziki Gurney, Meydan Ben Ishai, Chris Schulz, Saul Rajak\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/IOP.0000000000003073\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>In silicone sling frontalis suspension surgery, the sling is secured by passing both ends through a tight sleeve. Slippage of the silicone sling through the sleeve is likely a major reason for surgical failure. This ex vivo study compared different securing methods to improve the security of the sling in the sleeve.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This quantitative laboratory study compared 6 methods of securing the sling and sleeve to the control: 1) sutures to join the sleeve and sling, 2) 2-throw and 3) 3-throw square knots with the sling, 4) ligaclips, 5) cyanoacrylate surgical glue, and 6) a heat-shrink polyolefin sleeve. Tensile strength in Newtons (N) was measured to determine the force required to either initiate tail slippage or cause complete breakage of the silicone sling.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The securing methods, ranked by tensile strength, were: 3-throw square knot (4.3 N ±0.3), 2-throw square knot (3.7 N ±0.4), sutures (2.7 N ±0.5), ligaclips (1.3 N ±0.3), heat-shrink (1.1 N ±0.4), glue (0.6 N ±0.1), and control (0.2 N ±0.0). All methods, except glue, were significantly more effective than the control group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Multiple methods can greatly improve the security of the sling within the sleeve in these laboratory tests. However, further in vivo exploration is needed to assess other factors such as biocompatibility, risk of extrusion, adjustability, and prominence under the brow. The aim is to develop a quick and easy method to apply while allowing for safe removal or loosening to adjust lid height without introducing additional risks.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19588,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/IOP.0000000000003073\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/IOP.0000000000003073","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:在硅胶吊带额肌悬吊手术中,吊带的两端通过紧套固定。硅胶吊带滑过套筒可能是手术失败的主要原因。本离体研究比较了不同的固定方法,以提高袖内吊索的安全性。方法:本定量实验室研究比较了6种固定吊带与套筒的方法:1)套筒与吊带的缝合,2)2绳和3)3绳方结与吊带的连接,4)绑扎,5)氰基丙烯酸酯手术胶,6)热缩聚烯烃套筒。以牛顿(N)为单位测量拉伸强度,以确定启动尾部滑移或导致硅胶吊索完全断裂所需的力。结果:按抗拉强度排序,固定方法为:3圈方结(4.3 N±0.3)、2圈方结(3.7 N±0.4)、缝合(2.7 N±0.5)、绑扎(1.3 N±0.3)、热缩(1.1 N±0.4)、粘接(0.6 N±0.1)、对照(0.2 N±0.0)。除胶水外,其他方法均显著优于对照组。结论:采用多种方法可大大提高套筒内吊索的安全性。然而,需要进一步的体内研究来评估其他因素,如生物相容性、挤压风险、可调节性和眉下突出。目的是开发一种快速简便的方法,同时允许安全移除或松动以调整盖子高度,而不会引入额外的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ex Vivo Biomechanical Comparison of Silicone Sling Securing Methods for Frontalis Ptosis Repair.

Purpose: In silicone sling frontalis suspension surgery, the sling is secured by passing both ends through a tight sleeve. Slippage of the silicone sling through the sleeve is likely a major reason for surgical failure. This ex vivo study compared different securing methods to improve the security of the sling in the sleeve.

Methods: This quantitative laboratory study compared 6 methods of securing the sling and sleeve to the control: 1) sutures to join the sleeve and sling, 2) 2-throw and 3) 3-throw square knots with the sling, 4) ligaclips, 5) cyanoacrylate surgical glue, and 6) a heat-shrink polyolefin sleeve. Tensile strength in Newtons (N) was measured to determine the force required to either initiate tail slippage or cause complete breakage of the silicone sling.

Results: The securing methods, ranked by tensile strength, were: 3-throw square knot (4.3 N ±0.3), 2-throw square knot (3.7 N ±0.4), sutures (2.7 N ±0.5), ligaclips (1.3 N ±0.3), heat-shrink (1.1 N ±0.4), glue (0.6 N ±0.1), and control (0.2 N ±0.0). All methods, except glue, were significantly more effective than the control group.

Conclusions: Multiple methods can greatly improve the security of the sling within the sleeve in these laboratory tests. However, further in vivo exploration is needed to assess other factors such as biocompatibility, risk of extrusion, adjustability, and prominence under the brow. The aim is to develop a quick and easy method to apply while allowing for safe removal or loosening to adjust lid height without introducing additional risks.

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
2.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
322
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery features original articles and reviews on topics such as ptosis, eyelid reconstruction, orbital diagnosis and surgery, lacrimal problems, and eyelid malposition. Update reports on diagnostic techniques, surgical equipment and instrumentation, and medical therapies are included, as well as detailed analyses of recent research findings and their clinical applications.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信