Barbed and Non-Barbed Suture Materials for Ventral Hernia Repair: An Experimental Study
Authors:
- Georgy B. IvakhovGeorgy B. Ivakhov
- Svetlana M. TitkovaSvetlana M. Titkova
- Mikhail V. AnurovMikhail V. Anurov
- Aleksandra A. KalininaAleksandra A. Kalinina
- Konstantin I. ShadinKonstantin I. Shadin
- Vladimir V. SuglobVladimir V. Suglob
- Andrey V. AndriyashkinAndrey V. Andriyashkin
- Alexander V. SazhinAlexander V. Sazhin
Open Access
- 1 May 2025
- journal article
- research article
- Published by MDPI AG in Journal of Clinical Medicine
- Vol. 14 (9) , 3139
Abstract
Objectives: The objective of this study was to assess the tissue response and strength of traditional and unidirectional suture materials, depending on the conditions of use and the timing following implantation. Methods: Eighty male Wistar rats were randomly assigned to four groups depending on the suture used: unidirectional absorbable V-locTM 180 or non-absorbable V-locTM PBT and traditional absorbable MaxonTM or non-absorbable NovafilTM. Three and six weeks following the closure of the abdominal wall defect (AWD) and subcutaneous suture implantation at the withers according to group assignment, 10 animals from each group were euthanized for implanted sutures mechanical testing and histological examination. Results: The inflammatory reaction in the AWD closure area was maximal and significantly different from the subcutaneous implantation by week 3 for all groups. At six weeks, the tissue reaction did not depend on the place of implantation. However, four rats from the MaxonTM group demonstrated suture failure with diastasis formation. Non-absorbable barbed sutures exhibited an absence of suture failure and the maximum scar thickness. Both intact absorbable materials (V-LocTM 180 and MaxonTM) exhibited a significant breaking strength margin over the non-absorbable. By week 6, the preserved strength of the V-locTM 180 sutures at the AWD was 33% (15–58%), and under the skin—49.7% (48–59%) (p = 0.005). For MaxonTM, these values were 38% (35–48%) for the AWD and 44% (34–49%) for the subcutaneous implantation. Conclusions: Absorbable and non-absorbable suture materials, depending on the conditions and timing of implantation, cause various tissue reactions which could affect the wound healing and the number of postoperative complications.Keywords
Funding Information
- ANO “Moscow Center for Innovative Technologies in Healthcare”
This publication has 37 references indexed in Scilit:
- Safety and Effectiveness of Triclosan-Coated Polydioxanone (PDS Plus) versus Uncoated Polydioxanone (PDS II) Sutures for Prevention of Surgical Site Infection after Hypospadias Repair in Children: A 10-Year Single Center Experience with 550 HypospadiasBiomedicines, 2024
- Efficacy and safety of V-Loc™ barbed sutures versus conventional suture techniques in gynecological surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysisArchives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 2023
- Biomechanical and tissue reaction: the effects of varying sutures size on canine abdominal wall stitchingFrontiers in Veterinary Science, 2023
- A Review of Barbed Sutures—Evolution, Applications and Clinical SignificanceBioengineering, 2023
- Evaluating Pull-Out Strength of Barbed Suture In Vitro by Using Porcine Tissue and Polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS)Polymers, 2022
- Case Report: Bowel Occlusion Following the Use of Barbed Sutures in Abdominal Surgery. A Single-Center Experience and Literature ReviewFrontiers in Surgery, 2021
- PREPARE: guidelines for planning animal research and testingLaboratory Animals, 2017
- The Role of Knotless Barbed Suture in Gynecologic SurgerySurgical Innovation, 2014
- Laparoscopic vs Open Incisional Hernia RepairJAMA Surgery, 2013
- Laparoscopic versus open incisional hernia repairSurgical Endoscopy, 2007