Skip to main content
Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal 1/2018

04.10.2017 | Original Article

Comparison of strength of sacrocolpopexy mesh attachment using barbed and nonbarbed sutures

verfasst von: Marjorie L. Pilkinton, Gregory C. Levine, Laura Bennett, Harvey A. Winkler, Dara F. Shalom, Peter S. Finamore

Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal | Ausgabe 1/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

We aimed to assess the pull-out strength of barbed and nonbarbed sutures used in sacrocolpopexy mesh fixation. We hypothesized there are no differences in the force needed to dislodge mesh from tissue using barbed and nonbarbed sutures of similar size.

Methods

Using the rectus fascia of three unembalmed cadavers, a 6 × 3 cm strip of polypropylene mesh was anchored to the fascia with sutures. The barbed sutures investigated were 2-0 V-Loc 180 (nine trials) and 3-0 bidirectional Quill™ SRS PDO (five trials). The nonbarbed sutures included 2-0 PDS (nine trials), CV-2 GORE-TEX (nine trials) and 2-0 Prolene (nine trials). The free-end of the mesh was anchored to a pulley system fixed to a tensiometer to measure the peak force applied at the moment of mesh dislodgement (termed the pull-out force). The pull-out force was recorded. Continuous variables are presented as medians and interquartile ranges (IQR). Analysis of variance was used to compare the forces across the suture types.

Results

The highest pull-out force observed was with GORE-TEX (median 65.14 N, IQR 53.37–68.77 N) followed by Prolene (median 58.98 N, IQR 54.64–62.59 N), V-Loc (median 55.23 N, IQR 51.60–58.57 N), PDS (53.96 N, IQR 51.60–57.88 N), and Quill (44.44 N, IQR 17.27–47.38 N). All 2-0 and CV-2 caliber sutures had greater pull-out forces than 3-0 Quill sutures (p < 0.01). No significant differences in pull-out forces were observed between 2-0 and CV-2 caliber sutures (p > 0.05). In 35 of the 41 trials (85%), the mesh sheared from the tissue.

Conclusion

CV-2 ad 2-0 barbed and nonbarbed sutures had similar pull-out forces in an assessment of mesh fixation strength.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Schmid C. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;4:CD004014. Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Schmid C. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;4:CD004014.
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, Connolly A, Cundiff G, Weber AM, et al. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(4):805–23.CrossRefPubMed Nygaard IE, McCreery R, Brubaker L, Connolly A, Cundiff G, Weber AM, et al. Abdominal sacrocolpopexy: a comprehensive review. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(4):805–23.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Paraiso MF, Jelovsek JE, Frick A, Chen CC, Barber MD. Laparoscopic compared with robotic sacrocolpopexy for vaginal prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118(5):1005–13.CrossRefPubMed Paraiso MF, Jelovsek JE, Frick A, Chen CC, Barber MD. Laparoscopic compared with robotic sacrocolpopexy for vaginal prolapse: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118(5):1005–13.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Nosti PA, Umoh Andy U, Kane S, White DE, Harvie HS, Lowenstein L, et al. Outcomes of abdominal and minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy: a retrospective cohort study. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2014;20(1):33–7.CrossRefPubMed Nosti PA, Umoh Andy U, Kane S, White DE, Harvie HS, Lowenstein L, et al. Outcomes of abdominal and minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy: a retrospective cohort study. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2014;20(1):33–7.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Falcone T, Paraiso MF, Mascha E. Prospective randomized clinical trial of laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;180(4):955–62.CrossRefPubMed Falcone T, Paraiso MF, Mascha E. Prospective randomized clinical trial of laparoscopically assisted vaginal hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;180(4):955–62.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat De Gouveia De Sa M, Claydon LS, Whitlow B, Dolcet Artahona MA. Laparoscopic versus open sacrocolpopexy for treatment of prolapse of the apical segment of the vagina: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(1):3–17.CrossRefPubMed De Gouveia De Sa M, Claydon LS, Whitlow B, Dolcet Artahona MA. Laparoscopic versus open sacrocolpopexy for treatment of prolapse of the apical segment of the vagina: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(1):3–17.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Tan-Kim J, Nager CW, Grimes CL, Luber KM, Lukacz ES, Brown HW, et al. A randomized trial of vaginal mesh attachment techniques for minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(5):649–56.CrossRefPubMed Tan-Kim J, Nager CW, Grimes CL, Luber KM, Lukacz ES, Brown HW, et al. A randomized trial of vaginal mesh attachment techniques for minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(5):649–56.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Balgobin S, Good MM, Dillon SJ, Corton MM. Lowest colpopexy sacral fixation point alters vaginal axis and cul-de-sac depth. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;208(6):488.e1–e6.CrossRef Balgobin S, Good MM, Dillon SJ, Corton MM. Lowest colpopexy sacral fixation point alters vaginal axis and cul-de-sac depth. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;208(6):488.e1–e6.CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Shaw JM, Hamad NM, Coleman TJ, Egger MJ, Hsu Y, Hitchcock R, et al. Intra-abdominal pressures during activity in women using an intra-vaginal pressure transducer. J Sports Sci. 2014;32(12):1176–85.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Shaw JM, Hamad NM, Coleman TJ, Egger MJ, Hsu Y, Hitchcock R, et al. Intra-abdominal pressures during activity in women using an intra-vaginal pressure transducer. J Sports Sci. 2014;32(12):1176–85.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Costantini E, Brubaker L, Cervigni M, Matthews CA, O'Reilly BA, Rizk D, et al. Sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: evidence-based review and recommendations. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;205:60–5.CrossRefPubMed Costantini E, Brubaker L, Cervigni M, Matthews CA, O'Reilly BA, Rizk D, et al. Sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: evidence-based review and recommendations. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;205:60–5.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Callewaert G, Bosteels J, Housmans S, Verguts J, Van Cleynenbreugel B, Van der Aa F, et al. Laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review. Gynecol Surg. 2016;13:115–23.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Callewaert G, Bosteels J, Housmans S, Verguts J, Van Cleynenbreugel B, Van der Aa F, et al. Laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review. Gynecol Surg. 2016;13:115–23.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Gozen AS, Arslan M, Schulze M, Rassweiler J. Comparison of laparoscopic closure of the bladder with barbed polyglyconate versus polyglactin suture material in the pig bladder model: an experimental in vitro study. J Endourol. 2012;26(6):732–6.CrossRefPubMed Gozen AS, Arslan M, Schulze M, Rassweiler J. Comparison of laparoscopic closure of the bladder with barbed polyglyconate versus polyglactin suture material in the pig bladder model: an experimental in vitro study. J Endourol. 2012;26(6):732–6.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Zorn KC, Trinh QD, Jeldres C, Schmitges J, Widmer H, Lattouf JB, et al. Prospective randomized trial of barbed polyglyconate suture to facilitate vesico-urethral anastomosis during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: time reduction and cost benefit. BJU Int. 2012;109(10):1526–32.CrossRefPubMed Zorn KC, Trinh QD, Jeldres C, Schmitges J, Widmer H, Lattouf JB, et al. Prospective randomized trial of barbed polyglyconate suture to facilitate vesico-urethral anastomosis during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: time reduction and cost benefit. BJU Int. 2012;109(10):1526–32.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Grigoryants V, Baroni A. Effectiveness of wound closure with V-Loc 90 sutures in lipoabdominoplasty patients. Aesthet Surg J. 2013;33(1):97–101.CrossRefPubMed Grigoryants V, Baroni A. Effectiveness of wound closure with V-Loc 90 sutures in lipoabdominoplasty patients. Aesthet Surg J. 2013;33(1):97–101.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat De Blasi V, Facy O, Goergen M, Poulain V, De Magistris L, Azagra JS. Barbed versus usual suture for closure of the gastrojejunal anastomosis in laparoscopic gastric bypass: a comparative trial. Obes Surg. 2013;23(1):60–3.CrossRefPubMed De Blasi V, Facy O, Goergen M, Poulain V, De Magistris L, Azagra JS. Barbed versus usual suture for closure of the gastrojejunal anastomosis in laparoscopic gastric bypass: a comparative trial. Obes Surg. 2013;23(1):60–3.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Greenberg JA, Clark RM. Advances in suture material for obstetric and gynecologic surgery. Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2009;2(3):146–58.PubMedPubMedCentral Greenberg JA, Clark RM. Advances in suture material for obstetric and gynecologic surgery. Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2009;2(3):146–58.PubMedPubMedCentral
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Greenberg JA, Goldman RH. Barbed suture: a review of the technology and clinical uses in obstetrics and gynecology. Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2013;6(3-4):107–15.PubMedPubMedCentral Greenberg JA, Goldman RH. Barbed suture: a review of the technology and clinical uses in obstetrics and gynecology. Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2013;6(3-4):107–15.PubMedPubMedCentral
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Oni G, Brown SA, Kenkel JM. A comparison between barbed and nonbarbed absorbable suture for fascial closure in a porcine model. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;130(4):535e–40e.CrossRefPubMed Oni G, Brown SA, Kenkel JM. A comparison between barbed and nonbarbed absorbable suture for fascial closure in a porcine model. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;130(4):535e–40e.CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Comparison of strength of sacrocolpopexy mesh attachment using barbed and nonbarbed sutures
verfasst von
Marjorie L. Pilkinton
Gregory C. Levine
Laura Bennett
Harvey A. Winkler
Dara F. Shalom
Peter S. Finamore
Publikationsdatum
04.10.2017
Verlag
Springer London
Erschienen in
International Urogynecology Journal / Ausgabe 1/2018
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-017-3451-z

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2018

International Urogynecology Journal 1/2018 Zur Ausgabe

Urogynecology Digest

Urogynecology digest

Update Gynäkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.