Materials and methods: The Duncan, HU, SMC, Pretzel, Nicky's and square knots were selected for comparisons with UM knot. All knots were prepared with size 2 HiFi® suture by a single experienced surgeon and tested with cyclic loading and load to failure tests. The ease of learning was assessed objectively by recording the time to learn the first correct knot and the total number of knots completed in 5 min by surgeons and trainees.
Results: The UM knot average failure load is significantly superior to the HU knot (p
CASE PRESENTATION: We present here a novel technique of using intravenous (IV) cannula as an alternative to suture passer for fascial closure during laparoscopic IPOM repair for a 59-year-old patient with an incisional ventral hernia. The placement of non-absorbable sutures for fascial closure was done with the help of a 14 gauge IV cannula instead of a transfascial suture passer. The rest of the procedural steps were the same as a standard laparoscopic IPOM repair. The patient's post-operative recovery was uneventful.
DISCUSSION: Primary fascial closure during a laparoscopic IPOM hernia repair can be done either by intracorporeal or extracorporeal techniques, using interrupted or continuous sutures. We propose a novel alternative to suture passer in primary fascial closure. IV cannulas are widely available in hospital settings. The advantage of using an IV cannula instead of a suture passer is that they are widely available. Its single-use also eliminates the risk of transmissible diseases, and as it has a smaller diameter than suture passer, it requires a lower insertion force for successful placement.
CONCLUSION: An IV cannula may be used as a more economical alternative to a transfascial suture passer. This technique is easily reproducible and does not violate the principles of primary fascial defect closure in laparoscopic ventral hernia repair.
Methods: This multi-centre, international, single-arm, prospective observational study aimed at demonstrating the non-inferiority of a mid-term absorbable monofilament in comparison to braided sutures in gastrointestinal anastomosis. Monosyn suture was used to create the gastrointestinal anastomosis and the frequency of anastomotic leakage until day of discharge was chosen as the primary parameter. The outcome was compared to the results published for braided sutures in the literature. Secondary parameters were the time to perform the anastomosis, length of hospital stay, costs, and postoperative complications.
Results: The anastomosis leakage rate was 2.91%, indicating that Monosyn suture was not inferior to braided sutures used in gastrointestinal anastomosis. Of the reported anastomotic suture techniques, the single layer continuous method was the fastest and most economical technique in the present observational study.
Conclusion: Monosyn suture is safe and effective in gastrointestinal anastomosis and represents a good alternative to other sutures used for gastrointestinal anastomosis. With regard to safety, time and cost-efficiency, the single-layer continuous technique should be considered a preferred method. The transfer of results from clinical studies into daily practice with regard to surgical techniques for gastrointestinal anastomosis should be further evaluated in larger studies or in nationwide registries.