Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Arthroscopy The Jour...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Arthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery
Article . 2006 . Peer-reviewed
License: Elsevier TDM
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Sutures and Suture Anchors—Update 2006

Authors: F Alan, Barber; Morley A, Herbert; David A, Coons; Michael H, Boothby;

Sutures and Suture Anchors—Update 2006

Abstract

To evaluate recently introduced sutures and suture anchors for single pull load to failure strength and failure mode.Suture anchors were tested in fresh porcine metaphyseal cortex and cancellous troughs with the use of an established protocol. An Instron machine applied tensile loads parallel to the axis of insertion at a rate of 12.5 mm/sec until failure, and mean anchor failure strengths were calculated. The mode of failure (anchor pull-out, suture eyelet cut-out, or suture failure) was recorded. Anchors tested included the BioRaptor 2.9, BioZip, Super Revo, Impact, Allograft cortical anchor, SpiraLok, Herculon, AxyaLoop titanium anchors 3, 5, and 6.5 mm, AxyaLoop bioabsorbable anchors 3, 5, and 6.5, ParaFix titanium anchors 3, 5, and 6.5, ParaSorb BioAnchors 3, 5.5, and 6.5, and Bio-Corkscrew FT. Sutures were also tested through an established protocol for load to failure. Sutures tested consisted of Orthocord, Ultrabraid (White and CoBraid), ForceFiber, Hi-Fi, MagnumWire, and Maxbraid Polyethylene Plus.Mean failure loads were as follows: BioRaptor 238 N, BioZip 366 N, double-loaded Super Revo 486 N, triple-loaded Super Revo 362 N, Impact 202 N, Allograft cortical anchor 240 N, SpiraLok 289 N, Herculon 819 N, AxyaLoop titanium anchors 3.0 (335 N), 5.0 (485 N), and 6.5 mm (465 N), AxyaLoop bioabsorbable anchors 3 (143 N), 5 (395 N), and 6.5 (369 N), ParaFix titanium anchors 3 (335 N), 5 (485 N), and 6.5 (465 N), ParaSorb BioAnchors 3 (143 N), 5.5 (395 N), and 6.5 (369 N), and Bio-Corkscrew FT (260 N). The sutures all broke at the mid point of their tested strands away from the grips. Mean suture strength for No. 2 Orthocord was 92 N; for No. 2 Ultrabraid CoBraid and White, strengths were 265 N and 280 N, respectively; strength for No. 2 Force Fiber was 289 N, for No. 2 Hi-Fi 250 N, for No. 2 MagnumWire 303 N, and for No. 2 Maxbraid Polyethylene Plus 256 N.Newer suture products showed significant improvements in load to failure values when compared with braided polyester sutures. Higher load to failure values continue to be seen in metal versus biodegradable anchors and in screw-type versus nonscrew designs.Surgeons who prefer stronger sutures now have several high-strength suture options from which to choose. Most of the new anchors tested performed very well.

Keywords

Titanium, Sutures, Swine, Polyesters, Suture Techniques, Equipment Design, Weight-Bearing, Coated Materials, Biocompatible, Implants, Experimental, Polyethylene, Steel, Polydioxanone, Tensile Strength, Materials Testing, Animals, Equipment Failure, Femur, Polyglactin 910

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    113
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
113
Top 10%
Top 10%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!