An In Vivo Comparison : Novel Mesh Suture Versus Traditional Suture-Based Repair in a Rabbit Tendon Model
© 2021 The Authors..
Purpose: Despite advancements in surgical techniques, suture pull-though and rupture continue to limit the early range of motion and functional rehabilitation after flexor tendon repairs. The aim of this study was to evaluate a suturable mesh compared with a commonly used braided suture in an in vivo rabbit intrasynovial tendon model.
Methods: Twenty-four New Zealand female rabbits (3-4 kg) were injected with 2 units/kg botulinum toxin evenly distributed into 4 sites in the left calf. After 1 week, the animals underwent surgical tenotomy of the flexor digitorum tendon and were randomized to repair with either 2-0 Duramesh suturable mesh or to 2-0 Fiberwire using a 2-strand modified Kessler and 6-0 polypropylene running epitendinous suture. Rabbits were killed at 2, 4, and 9 weeks after surgery.
Results: Grouping across time points, 58.3% (7 of 12) of Duramesh repairs were found to be intact for the explant compared with 16.7% (2 of 12) of Fiberwire repairs (P = .09). At 2 weeks, the mean Duramesh repairs were significantly stronger than the Fiberwire repairs with a mean failure load of 50.7 ± 12.7 N compared to 14.8 ± 18.3 N (P = .02). The load supported by the Duramesh repairs at 2 weeks (mean 50.7 ± 12.7 N) was similar to the load supported by both Fiberwire (52.2 ± 13.6 N) and Duramesh (57.6 ± 22.3 N) at 4 weeks. The strength of repair between Fiberwire and Duramesh at 4 weeks and 9 weeks was not significantly different.
Conclusions: The 2-strand tendon repair with suturable mesh achieved significantly greater strength at 2 weeks than the conventional suture material. Future studies should evaluate the strength of repair prior to 2 weeks to determine the strength curve for this novel suture material.
Clinical Relevance: This study evaluates the utility of a novel suturable mesh for flexor tendon repair in an in vivo rabbit model compared with conventional suture material.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2022 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2022 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:4 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Journal of hand surgery global online - 4(2022), 1 vom: 05. Jan., Seite 32-39 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Janes, Lindsay E [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Revised 14.04.2022 published: Electronic-eCollection Citation Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1016/j.jhsg.2021.10.003 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM339451270 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM339451270 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231226002927.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231226s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.jhsg.2021.10.003 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1131.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM339451270 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)35415598 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Janes, Lindsay E |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 3 | |a An In Vivo Comparison |b Novel Mesh Suture Versus Traditional Suture-Based Repair in a Rabbit Tendon Model |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2022 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 14.04.2022 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Electronic-eCollection | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a © 2021 The Authors. | ||
| 520 | |a Purpose: Despite advancements in surgical techniques, suture pull-though and rupture continue to limit the early range of motion and functional rehabilitation after flexor tendon repairs. The aim of this study was to evaluate a suturable mesh compared with a commonly used braided suture in an in vivo rabbit intrasynovial tendon model | ||
| 520 | |a Methods: Twenty-four New Zealand female rabbits (3-4 kg) were injected with 2 units/kg botulinum toxin evenly distributed into 4 sites in the left calf. After 1 week, the animals underwent surgical tenotomy of the flexor digitorum tendon and were randomized to repair with either 2-0 Duramesh suturable mesh or to 2-0 Fiberwire using a 2-strand modified Kessler and 6-0 polypropylene running epitendinous suture. Rabbits were killed at 2, 4, and 9 weeks after surgery | ||
| 520 | |a Results: Grouping across time points, 58.3% (7 of 12) of Duramesh repairs were found to be intact for the explant compared with 16.7% (2 of 12) of Fiberwire repairs (P = .09). At 2 weeks, the mean Duramesh repairs were significantly stronger than the Fiberwire repairs with a mean failure load of 50.7 ± 12.7 N compared to 14.8 ± 18.3 N (P = .02). The load supported by the Duramesh repairs at 2 weeks (mean 50.7 ± 12.7 N) was similar to the load supported by both Fiberwire (52.2 ± 13.6 N) and Duramesh (57.6 ± 22.3 N) at 4 weeks. The strength of repair between Fiberwire and Duramesh at 4 weeks and 9 weeks was not significantly different | ||
| 520 | |a Conclusions: The 2-strand tendon repair with suturable mesh achieved significantly greater strength at 2 weeks than the conventional suture material. Future studies should evaluate the strength of repair prior to 2 weeks to determine the strength curve for this novel suture material | ||
| 520 | |a Clinical Relevance: This study evaluates the utility of a novel suturable mesh for flexor tendon repair in an in vivo rabbit model compared with conventional suture material | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Biomechanical study | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Mesh suture | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Tendon repair | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Mioton, Lauren M |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Fracol, Megan E |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ko, Jason H |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of hand surgery global online |d 2019 |g 4(2022), 1 vom: 05. Jan., Seite 32-39 |w (DE-627)NLM308983424 |x 2589-5141 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:4 |g year:2022 |g number:1 |g day:05 |g month:01 |g pages:32-39 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsg.2021.10.003 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 4 |j 2022 |e 1 |b 05 |c 01 |h 32-39 | ||