Clinical Biomechanics
Volume 24, Issue 4 , Pages 403-406, May 2009

A new technique for small and secure knots using slippery polyethylene sutures

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Shimane University School of Medicine, 89-1 Enya, Izumo, Shimane 693-8501, Japan

Received 23 August 2008; accepted 30 January 2009. published online 05 March 2009.

Abstract 

Background

Suture knots used in tendon surgery must be strong but small enough so that they do not hinder gliding. For this purpose, we devised a unique “antislip” knot.

Methods

Three suture materials were used: Ethibond, Fiberwire, and Nespron. They were tied with either the antislip knot using a pair of United States Pharmacopeia (USP) 2 sutures or with a conventional reef knot using USP2 single sutures. The volume and tensile strength of the knots were measured (n=25 for each combination of suture and method).

Findings

The maximum tensile strength was observed with Fiberwire antislip knots with five throws (mean 587N) and six throws (mean 590N), and Nespron antislip knots with five throws (mean 554N) and six throws (mean 552N); no significant differences were found among the four knots. Tensile strength per volume showed maximum values with Fiberwire antislip knots with four throws (mean 17.4N/μl) and five throws (mean 16.8N/μl), and Nespron antislip knots with four throws (mean 17.6N/μl) and five throws (mean 16.8N/μl), which were not significantly different and were over 1.25-fold greater than the value for a reef knot. Ethibond had less tensile strength than Fiberwire and Nespron.

Interpretation

The antislip knot is smaller for the same or greater strength than a conventional reef knot. The 4- or 5-throw antislip knot was most effective for slippery polyethylene sutures such as Fiberwire and Nespron. The antislip knot should improve biological healing of repaired tendons through accelerated rehabilitation.

Keywords: Knot, Suture, Polyethylene, Tendon, Tensile strength

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0268-0033(09)00028-X

doi:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2009.01.013

Clinical Biomechanics
Volume 24, Issue 4 , Pages 403-406, May 2009