Background
This study aimed to compare the biomechanical strength and permeability of barbed vs traditional suture for closure of the porcine knee joint.
This study aimed to compare the biomechanical strength and permeability of barbed vs traditional suture for closure of the porcine knee joint.
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.
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).
Standard and barbed suture had similar wound holding strength and permeability. The barbed suture was as stable as traditional suture.