Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2012 May;100(4):1053-8. doi: 10.1002/jbm.b.32670. Epub 2012 Jan 30.

Comparison of V-Loc™ 180 wound closure device and Quill™ PDO knotless tissue-closure device for intradermal closure in a porcine in vivo model: evaluation of biomechanical wound strength.

Author information

1
Covidien Surgical Devices, 60 Middletown Ave, North Haven, Connecticut 06473, USA. Kristen.Gingras@covidien.com

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

The objective of this study was to compare the biomechanical strength of two barbed suture devices: V-Loc™ 180 Wound Closure Device and Quill™ PDO Knotless Tissue-Closure Device following primary cosmetic skin closures in a porcine dermal model.

METHOD:

This prospective randomized, controlled in vivo trial compared size 3/0 V-Loc™ 180 device to size 2/0 Quill™ PDO device. Both products were tested for dermal closure in adult porcine models and evaluated at five timepoints. At postoperative days 0, 3, 7, 14, and 28 sutured tissue regions were excised post mortem and tested for intradermal wound holding strength.

RESULTS:

Wounds closed with V-Loc™ 180 device were stronger than Quill™ PDO device at days 0, 3, 7, and 14 with these differences being significant (p < 0.05) at days 3 and 7. At day 3, the average maximum load of V-Loc™ 180 was 13.53 kgf and Quill™ PDO was 10.38 kgf (p = 0.002). At day 7, the average maximum load of V-Loc™ 180 was 10.4 kgf and Quill™ PDO was 7.56 kgf (p = 0.001). Throughout the duration of the study, there was no suture extrusion or tissue distortion and all wounds healed with no major complications.

CONCLUSIONS:

In this study, V-Loc™ 180 device was significantly stronger than Quill™ PDO device during the critical phases of wound healing in skin.

PMID:
22287058
DOI:
10.1002/jbm.b.32670
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center