Skip to main content
Log in

An In Vitro and In Vivo Evaluation of Tensile Strength and Durability of Seven Suture Materials in Various pH and Different Conditions: An Experimental Study in Rats

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Development in material engineering provide many kinds of suture materials to medical fields. The choice of utilization depends on the surgeons decision, the durability, absorbtion times, tensile strength of the suture, and operation site in means of organ and tissue. In this study we aimed to investigate 7 different suture materials in vivo and in vitro conditions to evaluate the properties and durability. Basal tensile strength (TS) values of all sutures were measured and 168 Wistar albino rats were utilised in vivo groups. The sutures were placed in the bladder, stomach, intestine and bile duct (after obstructive jaundice). Urine and bile of rat, pH 1 and pH 10 were used as in vitro conditions. Seven different suture materials (Maxon, Vicryl, Plain Catgut, Surgical Silk, Polypropylene, Caprosyn and Biosyn) were investigated in 9 different in vitro and in vivo conditions. All sutures were chosen to be in size 5/0. In the following 5th day the sutures were tested related to durability and stability. Results were compared stastically using the Mann-Whitney U test and p < 0.05 was considered as stastically significant. Among all the suture materials only polypropylene proved to preserve its stability in vivo and in vitro surveys. Cat-gut and caprosyn lost its TS in all medias. Silk and biosyn lost its TS in all conditions except the stomach and intestines. Maxon also lost its TS in all condition except urine. Utilisation of caprosyn and biosyn in urinary procedures reduces stone formation and infections. The suture of choice in biliary tract should be vicryl, maxon or biosyn since polypropylene preserves its stability that could result in stone formation. In intestinal operations polypropylene, vicryl, and silk could be preferred.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sanz LE, Patterson JA, Kamath R, Willett G, Ahmed SW, Butterfield AB (1988) Comparison of Maxon suture with Vicryl, chromic catgut, and PDS sutures in fascial closure in rats. Obstet Gynecol 71:418–422

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Debus ES, Geiger D, Sailer M, Ederer J, Thiede A (1997) Physical, biological and handling characteristics of surgical suture material: a comparison of four different multifilament absorbable sutures. Eur Surg Res 29(1):52–61

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Chu CC, Moncrief G (1983) An in vitro evaluation of the stability of mechanical properties of surgical suture materials in various pH conditions. Ann Surg 198(2):223–228

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Greenberg JA, Clark RM (2009) Advances in suture material for obstetric and gynecologic surgery. Rev Obstet Gynecol 2(3):146–158

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Muftuoglu MA, Ozkan E, Saglam A (2004) Effect of human pancreatic juice and bile on the tensile strength of suture materials. Am J Surg 188(2):200–203

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Tomihata K, Suzuki M, Ikada Y (2001) The pH dependence of monofilament sutures on hydrolytic degradation. J Biomed Mater Res 58(5):511–518

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Mizuma K, Lee PC, Howard JM (1977) The disintegration of surgical sutures on exposure to pancreatic juice. Ann Surg 186(6):718–722

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Vasanthan A, Satheesh K, Hoopes W, Lucaci P, Williams K, Rapley J (2009) Comparing suture strengths for clinical applications: a novel in vitro study. J Periodontol 80(4):618–624

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Brown RP (1992) Knotting technique and suture materials. Br J Surg 79:399–400

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Greenberg CB, Davidson EB, Bellmer DD, Morton RJ, Payton ME (2004) Evaluation of the tensile strengths of four monofilament absorbable suture materials after immersion in canine urine with or without bacteria. Am J Vet Res 65(6):847–853

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ramazan Karabulut.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Karabulut, R., Sonmez, K., Turkyilmaz, Z. et al. An In Vitro and In Vivo Evaluation of Tensile Strength and Durability of Seven Suture Materials in Various pH and Different Conditions: An Experimental Study in Rats. Indian J Surg 72, 386–390 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-010-0158-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-010-0158-5

Keywords

Navigation