A comparison of suture retention strengths for three biomaterials

F. Joseph Obermiller*, Jason P. Hodde, Chad S. McAlexander, Klod Kokini, Stephen F. Badylak

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

30 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: The suture holding capacity, suture retention strength, and burst strength of three biomaterials (Marlex®, SIS, and PeriGuard®) were evaluated to compare their performance characteristics in an ex vivo setting representing the immediate postoperative period. Material/Methods: A circular defect was created in the fascial tissue of the abdominal aponeurosis collected from normal dogs. Defects were repaired with either Marlex (polypropylene mesh), Periguard (bovine pericardium) or small intestinal submucosa (SIS) using 2-0 prolene and a 1.0-cm suture bite. The force required to induce failure at the repair site was recorded as the suture-holding capacity. Suture retention strength was calculated as the load distribution over the specimen cross-section in contact with the suture at the time of rupture. Burst strength of the raw materials was also measured. Results: The suture-holding capacity was 370.9±56.2 N for Marlex; 214.3±36.1 N for Periguard, and 287.9±34.3 N for SIS. The suture retention strengths were: Marlex, 413.4±59.7 N/mm2; Periguard, 97.0±20.1 N/mm2; and SIS, 106.9±12.7 N/mm2. The burst strength of Marlex, Periguard and SIS were 476.7±50.8 N, 432.12±82.1 N, and 433.6±79.5 N respectively. Conclusions: All three materials provide adequate strength and suture-holding capacities to be of use in the repair of soft tissue defects.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)PI1-PI5
JournalMedical Science Monitor
Volume10
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 2004
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Biomaterial
  • Pericardium
  • Polypropylene
  • Small intestinal submucosa (SIS)
  • Soft tissue repair

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A comparison of suture retention strengths for three biomaterials'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this