Barbed suture tenorrhaphy: an ex vivo biomechanical analysis
- PMID: 20009841
- DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181babb77
Barbed suture tenorrhaphy: an ex vivo biomechanical analysis
Abstract
Background: Using barbed suture for flexor tenorrhaphy could permit knotless repair with tendon-barb adherence along the suture's entire length. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the tensile strength and repair-site profile of a technique of barbed suture tenorrhaphy.
Methods: Thirty-eight cadaveric flexor digitorum profundus tendons were randomized to polypropylene barbed suture repair in a knotless three-strand or six-strand configuration, or to unbarbed four-strand cruciate repair. For each repair, the authors recorded the repair site cross-sectional area before and after tenorrhaphy. Tendons were distracted to failure, and data regarding load at failure and mode of failure were recorded.
Results: The mean cross-sectional area ratio of control repairs was 1.5 +/- 0.3, whereas that of three-strand and six-strand barbed repairs was 1.2 +/- 0.2 (p = 0.009) and 1.2 +/- 0.1 (p = 0.005), respectively. Mean load to failure of control repairs was 29 +/- 7 N, whereas that of three-strand and six-strand barbed repairs was 36 +/- 7 N (p = 0.32) and 88 +/- 4 N (p < 0.001), respectively. All cruciate repairs failed by knot rupture or suture pullout, whereas barbed repairs failed by suture breakage in 13 of 14 repairs (p < 0.001).
Conclusions: In an ex vivo model of flexor tenorrhaphy, a three-strand barbed suture technique achieved tensile strength comparable to that of four-strand cruciate repairs and demonstrated significantly less repair-site bunching. A six-strand barbed suture technique demonstrated increased tensile strength compared with four-strand cruciate controls and significantly less repair-site bunching. Barbed suture repair may offer several advantages in flexor tenorrhaphy, and further in vivo testing is warranted.
References
-
- Strickland JW. Flexor tendon surgery: Part I. Primary flexor tendon repair. J Hand Surg (Br.) 1989;14:261–272.
-
- Strickland JW. Development of flexor tendon surgery: Twenty-five years of progress. J Hand Surg (Am.) 2000;25:214–235.
-
- Aoki M, Kubota H, Pruitt DL, Manske PR. Biomechanical and histologic characteristics of canine flexor tendon repair using early postoperative mobilization. J Hand Surg (Am.) 1997;22:107–114.
-
- Cullen KW, Tolhurst P, Lang D, Page RE. Flexor tendon repair in zone 2 followed by controlled active mobilisation. J Hand Surg (Br.) 1989;14:392–395.
-
- Bainbridge LC, Robertson DC, Gillies D, Elliot D. A comparison of postoperative mobilization of flexor tendon repairs with “passive flexion-active extension” and “controlled active motion” techniques. J Hand Surg (Br.) 1994;19:517–521.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources