An innovative method to evaluate the suture compliance in sealing the surgical wound lips

11Citations
Citations of this article
32Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background and aim: The increasing number of surgical procedures performed with local anesthesia, followed by immediate patient discharge from the hospital, emphasizes the need for a tight waterproof suture that is capable of maintaining its tensile strength in the postoperative phase when the wound tumescence, edema due to the anesthetic drug, and surgical trauma disappear. Moreover, the issue of having an accurate surgical wound closure is very relevant in vivo in order to prevent hemorrhage and exogenous microbial infections. This study aimed at designing a new a lab technique that could be used for evaluating the best surgical material. Using such a technique, we compared the wound-lip-sealing properties of three commonly-used suture threads, namely polyurethane, polypropylene, and polyamide. Materials and methods: The mechanical properties of same-size suture threads made from polyurethane, polypropylene, and polyamide, were compared in order to define the one that possess the best elastic properties by being able to counteract the tension-relaxation process in the first 12 hours following surgery. The tension holding capacity of the suture materials was measured in both in vivo and in vitro experiments. The surface area of the scar associated with the three different suture threads was measured and compared, and the permeability of the three different suture threads was assessed at 0 minute, 2 minute, 4 minute, 6 minute, and 8 minute- interval. Results: Results showed that polyurethane suture threads had significantly (P < 0.05) better tensile strength, elongation endurance before breakage, and better elasticity coefficient as compared to polypropylene and polyamide suture threads. Moreover, polyurethane suture threads were significantly (P < 0.05) more impermeable as compared to the other two suture thread types (polypropylene and polyamide). This impermeability was also associated with a tighter wound-lip-sealing ability, and with significantly (P < 0.05) less scar formation. Conclusion: Among the main concerns that surgeons, physicians, and patients often have is the development infection, oozing, and scar at the incision site following suturing. This always raises the question about which suture to use to avoid the above problems. This study provides evidence that the new technique developed in our lab could be used to compare the wound-lip sealing properties of different surgical suture threads. Using such a technique, the results show that polyurethane is significantly better than other commonly-used suture threads, like polypropylene and polyamide, in relation to wound sealing and scar formation. © Ivyspring International Publisher. All rights reserved.

References Powered by Scopus

Selection of wound closure materials

104Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The role of sutures and fibrin sealant in wound healing

103Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

A double scanning microphotometer for image analysis: Hardware, software and biomedical applications

70Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Smart self-tightening surgical suture from a tough bio-based hyperbranched polyurethane/reduced carbon dot nanocomposite

32Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

A comparative study of immediate wound healing complications following cleft lip repair using either absorbable or non-absorbable skin sutures

12Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Novel Bioactive Glass/Graphene Oxide-Coated Surgical Sutures for Soft Tissue Regeneration

10Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Saleh, F., Palmieri, B., Lodi, D., & Al-Sebeih, K. (2008). An innovative method to evaluate the suture compliance in sealing the surgical wound lips. International Journal of Medical Sciences, 5(6), 354–360. https://doi.org/10.7150/ijms.5.354

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 11

61%

Researcher 3

17%

Professor / Associate Prof. 2

11%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

11%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 12

63%

Engineering 5

26%

Materials Science 1

5%

Computer Science 1

5%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 3

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free