How to close a colpotomy? Barbed suture and conventional suture effects on soft tissue: an ex vivo pilot study

Comparison of two different barbed suture materials for end-to-end jejuno-jejunal anastomosis in pigs

BACKGROUND

Hand-sewn intestinal anastomoses are a fundamental procedure in both open and laparoscopic intestinal surgery. Self-retaining barbed suture devices have been tested for a variety of surgical applications. With the exception of clinical reports and various experimental studies on enterotomy, little has been published so far on the use of barbed suture for end-to-end intestinal anastomoses. The aim of the study was to compare two different barbed suture materials for end-to-end jejuno-jejunal anastomosis in pigs. End-to-end jejuno-jejunal anastomosis were performed with unidirectional barbed (A group), bidirectional barbed (B group) or normal (C group) sutures in each animal. A comparison was then made between the groups based on adhesions scoring, suturing time, bursting pressure and histopathology.

RESULTS

Mean construction times in the A group (518 ± 40 s) and in the B group (487 ± 45 s) were significantly lower than in the C group (587 ± 63 s) but were not different between A and B group (P = 0.10). Mean bursting pressures were significantly higher in the intact intestine (197 ± 13 mmHg) than in any other group (group A 150 ± 16 mmHg, group B 145 ± 22 mmHg, group C 145 ± 24 mmHg). Among anastomotic techniques, the bursting pressures were not significantly different. Histologically no difference could be detected in the grade of inflammation, collagen deposition and neovascularization at the anastomotic sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Barbed sutures can be effectively used for handsewn end-to-end jejunojejunal anastomosis in pigs. They are comparable to normal suture but could provide a shorter surgical time.

Unidirectional barbed suture for vaginal cuff closure without backward stitch in total laparoscopic hysterectomy

AIM

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of unidirectional barbed suture technique for vaginal cuff closure in total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH).

METHODS

In a retrospective chart review, data were analyzed from 165 patients who underwent a TLH with an unidirectional barbed suture technique for vaginal cuff closure from January 2012 to June 2016 at tertiary-care university-based teaching hospital and academic affiliated hospital. Vaginal cuff was closed by single layer 3/0 V-Loc unidirectional 9″, 180 day Absorbable Wound Closure Device (Covidien Healthcare, Mansfield, MA) and the suture was not stitched backward to secure distal end.

RESULTS

A total of 165 patients were included and the median age was 50 years (range, 35-84 years). The median completion time for hysterectomy time was 100 min (range, 40-240 min) and the median vaginal cuff closure time was 7 min (range, 4-15 min). The median estimated blood loss was 87.8 mL (range 30-250 mL) and the median uterine weight was 200 g (range, 40-900 g). Intraoperative complication included bladder perforation (1.2%) and postoperative complications were vaginal cuff dehiscence (1.8%), cuff cellulitis (0.6%), vesicovaginal fistula (0.6%) and unexplained fever (0.6%).

CONCLUSION

According to the results of current study, the use of unidirectional barbed suture without backward stitching appears to be safe for the vaginal cuff closure in TLH.

Comparison of Standard Suture vs Barbed Suture for Closing the Porcine Knee Joint: Evaluation of Biomechanical Integrity and Permeability

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare the biomechanical strength and permeability of barbed vs traditional suture for closure of the porcine knee joint.

METHODS

This study used Duroc pig knee joints. For each specimen, a 5-cm medial parapatellar arthrotomy was performed with the knee at 30° of flexion. We closed the arthrotomy wound using barbed suture (size 1/0 V-Loc 180) or traditional suture (size 1/0 PDS II). Specimens were divided into a PDS II (n = 9) and a V-Loc group (n = 9) for biomechanical testing, and a PDS II (n = 9) and a V-Loc group (n = 9) for permeability testing. In biomechanical testing, a continuous load was applied and the wound was pulled apart at 50 mm/min. We compared the maximum load under which each suture type could maintain wound closure. In permeability testing, the knee joints were flexed and extended for 200 cycles at 0.5 Hz from 0° to 120° of flexion. A tube was fixed in the articular cavity of the specimen and connected to a 1.5-m high water capsule. The time taken to wound effusion was compared.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the mean load at initial failure for PDS II (424 ± 192 N) vs V-Loc (471 ± 100 N, P = .529), or between the mean time until effusion for PDS II (6.8 ± 3.4 seconds) vs V-Loc (5.5 ± 2.5 seconds, P = .390).

CONCLUSION

Standard and barbed suture had similar wound holding strength and permeability. The barbed suture was as stable as traditional suture.

Unidirectional barbed suture versus interrupted vicryl suture in vaginal cuff healing during robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy

This study examined the performance of unidirectional barbed suture versus polyglactin 910 with respect to vaginal cuff healing in robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy (RATLH). This was a retrospective cohort study of 93 patients who underwent RATLH in a teaching hospital from July 2008 to June 2012. In the first 44 patients, the vaginal cuff was closed by interrupted polyglactin (Vicryl) 2-0 suture. In the following 49 patients, unidirectional barbed suture (V-loc) in a running fashion was used for cuff closure. Patients were seen 2 and 6 weeks postoperatively to evaluate cuff healing. Age, tobacco use, hemoglobin, deliveries, uterine weight, menopause, steroid use, underlying health problems, and concomitant procedures were found not to be significantly different between the two groups. There was one cuff dehiscence in the unidirectional barbed suture group and none in the interrupted polyglactin group (P > 0.05). The mean cuff healing time (8.5 vs. 7.7 weeks), incidence of cuff cellulitis (4.6 vs. 4.1 %), and postoperative bleeding (22.7 vs. 14.3 %) were not statistically significantly different between polyglactin and barbed suture closures, respectively (P > 0.05). However, polyglactin suture was associated with greater presence of granulation tissue than barbed suture (27.3 vs. 8.2 %, odds ratio = 3.34, P < 0.05). Unidirectional barbed suture cases were associated with shorter total operative times (220.2 vs. 272.8 min) and less estimated blood loss (164.8 vs. 274.9 ml); however, cuff closure times were not specifically measured. In our study, unidirectional barbed suture was identified as possibly superior to polyglactin cuff closure because of less observed granulation tissue, shorter operative duration, and lower estimated blood loss. However, there was no statistical difference in cuff healing time, cuff dehiscence, cellulitis, or postoperative bleeding between the two groups. A prospective randomized trial would be necessary to confirm these findings.