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.
Keywords: barbed suture; biomechanical integrity; permeability; porcine knee joint; traditional suture.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.