Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35415598›Full record

ArticleJournal of hand surgery global online2022

An In Vivo Comparison: Novel Mesh Suture Versus Traditional Suture-Based Repair in a Rabbit Tendon Model.

Lindsay E Janes, Lauren M Mioton, Megan E Fracol, Jason H Ko

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of hand surgery global online, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 43% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lindsay E JanesDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL.
Lauren M MiotonDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL.
Megan E FracolDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL.
Jason H KoDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL.
Northwestern University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Despite advancements in surgical techniques, suture pull-though and rupture continue to limit the early range of motion and functional rehabilitation after flexor tendon repairs. The aim of this study was to evaluate a suturable mesh compared with a commonly used braided suture in an in vivo rabbit intrasynovial tendon model. Methods: Twenty-four New Zealand female rabbits (3-4 kg) were injected with 2 units/kg botulinum toxin evenly distributed into 4 sites in the left calf. After 1 week, the animals underwent surgical tenotomy of the flexor digitorum tendon and were randomized to repair with either 2-0 Duramesh suturable mesh or to 2-0 Fiberwire using a 2-strand modified Kessler and 6-0 polypropylene running epitendinous suture. Rabbits were killed at 2, 4, and 9 weeks after surgery. Results: Grouping across time points, 58.3% (7 of 12) of Duramesh repairs were found to be intact for the explant compared with 16.7% (2 of 12) of Fiberwire repairs ( Conclusions: The 2-strand tendon repair with suturable mesh achieved significantly greater strength at 2 weeks than the conventional suture material. Future studies should evaluate the strength of repair prior to 2 weeks to determine the strength curve for this novel suture material. Clinical Relevance: This study evaluates the utility of a novel suturable mesh for flexor tendon repair in an in vivo rabbit model compared with conventional suture material.

Indexed as

Biomechanical studyMesh sutureTendon repair

Identifiers

PMID35415598
PMCPMC8991626
OpenAlexW3214738221

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.