Flexor Tenorrhaphy Using Absorbable Suture Materials

 

 Permissions and Reprints

Background Nonabsorbable sutures are favorable for repairing flexor tendons. However, absorbable sutures have performed favorably in an animal model.

Methods Two-strand sutures using the interlocking modified Kessler method with polydioxanone absorbable sutures 4-0 were used to repair completely ruptured flexor tendons in 55 fingers from 41 consecutive patients. The medical records of average 42 follow up weeks were analyzed retrospectively. The data analyzed using the chi-squared test, and Fisher's exact test was used for postoperative complications. The results were compared with those of other studies.

Results Among the index, middle, ring, and little fingers were injured in 9, 17, 16, and 13 fingers, respectively. The injury levels varied from zone 1 to 5. Of the 55 digits in our study, there were 26 (47%) isolated flexor digitorum profundus (FDP) injuries and 29 (53%) combined FDP and with flexor digitorum superficialis injuries. Pulley repair was also conducted. Concomitant injuries of blood vessels and nerves were found in 17 patients (23 fingers); nerve injuries occurred in 5 patients (10 fingers). Two patients had ruptures (3.6%), and one patient had two adhesions (3.6%). Using the original Strickland criteria, all the patients were assessed to be excellent or good. Also, fibrosis and long-term foreign body tissue reactions such as stitch granuloma were less likely occurred in our study. Compared to the Cullen's report that used nonabsorbable sutures, there was no significant difference in the rupture or adhesion rates.

Conclusions Therefore, this study suggests that appropriate absorbable core sutures can be used safely for flexor tendon repairs.

This article was presented at the Research and Reconstructive Forum on May 12-13, 2011 in Daejeon, Korea.

Publication History

Received: 08 March 2012

Accepted: 23 May 2012

Article published online:
01 May 2022

© 2012. The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, permitting unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

• REFERENCES

• 1 Kleinert HE, Spokevicius S, Papas NH. History of flexor tendon repair. J Hand Surg Am 1995; 20: S46-S52
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 David GW. Flexor tendon injuries and reconstruction. In: Mathes SJ, Hentz VR. Mathes plastic surgery. 2006. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier; 359-382
  Google Scholar
• 3 Trail IA, Powell ES, Noble J. An evaluation of suture materials used in tendon surgery. J Hand Surg Br 1989; 14: 422-427
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Pabari A, Iyer S, Branford OA. et al. Palmar granuloma following flexor tendon repair using Ticron: a case for absorbable suture material?. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2011; 64: 409-411
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 O'Broin ES, Earley MJ, Smyth H. et al. Absorbable sutures in tendon repair: a comparison of PDS with prolene in rabbit tendon repair. J Hand Surg Br 1995; 20: 505-508
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Cullen KW, Tolhurst P, Lang D. et al. Flexor tendon repair in zone 2 followed by controlled active mobilisation. J Hand Surg Br 1989; 14: 392-395
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Small JO, Brennen MD, Colville J. Early active mobilisation following flexor tendon repair in zone 2. J Hand Surg Br 1989; 14: 383-391
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Strickland JW, Glogovac SV. Digital function following flexor tendon repair in Zone II: a comparison of immobilization and controlled passive motion techniques. J Hand Surg Am 1980; 5: 537-543
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Tang JB. Clinical outcomes associated with flexor tendon repair. Hand Clin 2005; 21: 199-210
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Caulfield RH, Maleki-Tabrizi A, Patel H. et al. Comparison of zones 1 to 4 flexor tendon repairs using absorbable and unabsorbable four-strand core sutures. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2008; 33: 412-417
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Elliot D, Moiemen NS, Flemming AF. et al. The rupture rate of acute flexor tendon repairs mobilized by the controlled active motion regimen. J Hand Surg Br 1994; 19: 607-612
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Moiemen NS, Elliot D. Primary flexor tendon repair in zone 1. J Hand Surg Br 2000; 25: 78-84
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Siler VE. Primary tenorrhaphy of the flexor tendons in the hand. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1950; 32A: 218-225
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Miller JM. A new era of non-absorbable sutures. Exp Med Surg 1970; 28: 274-280
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Strickland JW. Development of flexor tendon surgery: twenty-five years of progress. J Hand Surg Am 2000; 25: 214-235
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Ikuta Y, Tsuge K. Postoperative results of looped nylon suture used in injuries of the digital flexor tendons. J Hand Surg Br 1985; 10: 67-72
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Chusak RB, Dibbell DG. Clinical experience with polydioxanone monofilament absorbable sutures in plastic surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 1983; 72: 217-221
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Bourne RB, Bitar H, Andreae PR. et al. In-vivo comparison of four absorbable sutures: Vicryl, Dexon Plus, Maxon and PDS. Can J Surg 1988; 31: 43-45
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Wada A, Kubota H, Akiyama T. et al. Effect of absorbable polydioxanone flexor tendon repair and restricted active mobilization in a canine model. J Hand Surg Am 2001; 26: 398-406
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Momeni A, Grauel E, Chang J. Complications after flexor tendon injuries. Hand Clin 2010; 26: 179-189
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Mashadi ZB, Amis AA. The effect of locking loops on the strength of tendon repair. J Hand Surg Br 1991; 16: 35-39
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar