We have located links that may give you full text access.
Do barbed sutures with different surface textures have different effects on adhesion formation and histological features? An experimental blinded study in an animal model.
Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine : Official Organ Wroclaw Medical University 2019 January 31
BACKGROUND: The obstetrics and gynecology literature has expanded in recent years to include clinical trials assessing the use of barbed sutures. The difficulty of intracorporeal suturing continues to be a barrier to a wider use of laparoscopy. Although the use of barbed sutures has been shown to ease the process of laparoscopic suturing considerably, concerns have been raised regarding a potentially increased risk of adhesions or inflammation as a result of their use.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine whether differences in surface textures, resulting from the variations in the geometric configurations of barbs, lead to differences in intra-abdominal adhesion formation.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 27 non-pregnant female Wistar Hannover rats, weighing 200-250 g, with intact uteri were used as an adhesion formation model. The rats were randomly assigned to 3 groups: barbed suture group 1, barbed suture group 2 and control group (no intracorporeal suture). A 2-centimeter vertical incision was performed on the anti-mesosalpingeal side of one of the uterine horns. The incision on the uterine horn was reapproximated with a running suture, entailing 3 needle punctures and left untied at one end. Six weeks after the operation, intra-abdominal adhesion formations were investigated both clinically and histopathologically.
RESULTS: Clinical adhesion scores and histopathological parameters in both the barbed suture groups were statistically significantly higher than in the control group (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the barbed suture groups regarding the adhesion scores.
CONCLUSIONS: The 2 types of barbed sutures with different surface textures, used for myometrial closure, form a similar profile with respect to postoperative adhesion formation.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine whether differences in surface textures, resulting from the variations in the geometric configurations of barbs, lead to differences in intra-abdominal adhesion formation.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 27 non-pregnant female Wistar Hannover rats, weighing 200-250 g, with intact uteri were used as an adhesion formation model. The rats were randomly assigned to 3 groups: barbed suture group 1, barbed suture group 2 and control group (no intracorporeal suture). A 2-centimeter vertical incision was performed on the anti-mesosalpingeal side of one of the uterine horns. The incision on the uterine horn was reapproximated with a running suture, entailing 3 needle punctures and left untied at one end. Six weeks after the operation, intra-abdominal adhesion formations were investigated both clinically and histopathologically.
RESULTS: Clinical adhesion scores and histopathological parameters in both the barbed suture groups were statistically significantly higher than in the control group (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the barbed suture groups regarding the adhesion scores.
CONCLUSIONS: The 2 types of barbed sutures with different surface textures, used for myometrial closure, form a similar profile with respect to postoperative adhesion formation.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app