Skip to main content
Annals of Surgery logoLink to Annals of Surgery
. 1983 Aug;198(2):223–228. doi: 10.1097/00000658-198308000-00019

An in vitro evaluation of the stability of mechanical properties of surgical suture materials in various pH conditions.

C C Chu, G Moncrief
PMCID: PMC1353084  PMID: 6870380

Abstract

The effects of pH on the tensile properties of eight commonly used 2-0 suture materials--plain catgut, Dexon, Vicryl, silk, Nurolon, Ethilon, Mersilene, and Prolene--were examined. The pH level ranged from 3.0 to 10.0. In general, absorbable suture materials were more sensitive to pH than non-absorbable suture materials; within the same suture materials, a strong alkaline condition would have a more adverse effect on the strength of suture materials than physiologic and acidic pHs. Plain catgut sutures lost relatively significant amounts of strength at both acidic and alkaline conditions when compared with Dexon and Vicryl sutures; hence, precaution should be taken when they are used in closing tissues in contact with acidic environment like the stomach. Among the non-absorbable suture materials, silk and Nurolon exhibited the largest loss of strength in both alkaline and acidic environments after one month, while other sutures retained almost all of their original strength. Physical configuration of the suture materials seemed also to contribute to the sensitivity of suture materials toward pH. A comparison of Nurolon and Ethilon sutures demonstrated this point of view.

Full text

PDF
223

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Brannan W., Ochsner M. G., Pond H. S., 3rd, Fuselier H. A., Jr, Scharfenberg J. C. Laboratory and clinical experience with polyglycolic acid suture in urogenital surgery. J Urol. 1973 Nov;110(5):571–573. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)60283-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Chu C. C. A comparison of the effect of pH on the biodegradation of two synthetic absorbable sutures. Ann Surg. 1982 Jan;195(1):55–59. doi: 10.1097/00000658-198201001-00009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Chu C. C. Mechanical properties of suture materials: an important characterization. Ann Surg. 1981 Mar;193(3):365–371. doi: 10.1097/00000658-198103000-00021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Chu C. C. The effect of pH on the in vitro degradation of poly(glycolide lactide) copolymer absorbable sutures. J Biomed Mater Res. 1982 Mar;16(2):117–124. doi: 10.1002/jbm.820160204. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Chu C. C. The in-vitro degradation of poly(glycolic acid) sutures--effect of pH. J Biomed Mater Res. 1981 Nov;15(6):795–804. doi: 10.1002/jbm.820150604. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Hastings J. C., Winkle W. V., Barker E., Hines D., Nichols W. Effect of suture materials on healing wounds of the stomach and colon. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1975 May;140(5):701–707. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Holm-Jensen S., Agner E. Syntetisk absorberbart suturmateriale (PGA) sammenlignet med catgut. Ugeskr Laeger. 1974 Aug 5;136(32):1785–1790. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Kaminski J. M., Katz A. R., Woodward S. C. Urinary bladder calculus formation on sutures in rabbits, cats and dogs. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1978 Mar;146(3):353–357. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Milroy E. An experimental study of the calcification and absorption of polyglycolic acid and catgut sutures within the urinary tract. Invest Urol. 1976 Sep;14(2):141–142. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Salthouse T. N., Kaminska G. Z., Murphy M. L., Williams J. A., Willigan D. A. Suture absorption in rabbit cornea and sclera: enzyme histochemical and morphologic observations. Invest Ophthalmol. 1970 Nov;9(11):844–856. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Salthouse T. N., Williams J. A., Willigan D. A. Relationship of cellular enzyme activity to catgut and collagen suture absorption. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1969 Oct;129(4):691–696. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Yudofsky S. C., Scott F. B. Urolithiasis on suture materials: its importance, pathogenesis and prophylaxis: an introduction to the monofilament teflon suture. J Urol. 1969 Dec;102(6):745–749. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)62243-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Annals of Surgery are provided here courtesy of Lippincott, Williams, and Wilkins

RESOURCES