In vivo assessment of absorbable knotless barbed suture for single layer gastrotomy and enterotomy closure.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance of an absorbable barbed suture device to absorbable monofilament suture after single layer, appositional gastrotomy and enterotomy closure. STUDY DESIGN: Experimental comparative study. ANIMALS: Purpose-bred adult mongrel hounds (n = 14). METHODS: Bursting strengths up to 250 mmHg of incisional closure with either monofilament or barbed suture in a simple continuous, appositional pattern at sites in the stomach (2), jejunum (4), and colon (4) were compared at postoperative Days 3, 7, and 14. Time for incisional closure was compared between materials. RESULTS: Bursting strength was not significantly different between gastrotomies/enterotomies closed with the monofilament suture or the barbed device. Closure time was significantly reduced with the barbed device in jejunal enterotomy closure. CONCLUSION: The barbed device compared favorably with monofilament suture for gastrotomy and enterotomy (small intestine, colon) closure. Results demonstrate comparable burst strengths between monofilament suture and the barbed device. Closure time was significantly reduced in jejunum closure using the barbed device.

Evaluation of a barbed suture device versus conventional suture in a canine enterotomy model.

BACKGROUND: Unidirectional, barbed suture allows knotless wound closure with potential value for the progression of advanced suturing techniques. This study compared an absorbable barbed suture device to a monofilament suture in a single-layer enterotomy closure model. METHODS: A series of 10 enterotomies were created in the stomach, jejunum, and colon through midline laparotomy in 13 mongrels. The enterotomies were closed in a simple continuous pattern and randomized to either conventional suture secured with three square knots or a barbed suture device without knots. Closure time was recorded for each sample. Adhesion scores and biomechanical wound strengths were assessed at postoperative days 3, 10, and 21 by burst pressure testing. RESULTS: Barbed suture provided a faster closure compared to conventional suture (p ≤ .02). There was no significant difference in burst pressures or adhesion scores between barbed suture and monofilament suture enterotomy closures at day 3, 10, or 21. CONCLUSION: Enterotomy closure was faster using the barbed device as compared to conventional suture, with no significant difference in burst strength or adhesion scores at any time point.