Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair is a commonly performed procedure in children. Currently, monofilament polypropylene and braided silk are the two most frequently used materials. Studies have suggested more tissue inflammatory reactions with the use of multifilament non-absorbable sutures. However, little is known about the effects of suture materials on adjacent vas deferens. The aim of this experiment was to compare the effect of non-absorbable monofilament and multifilament sutures on vas deferens in laparoscopic hernia repair.
METHODS: All animal operations were performed by a single surgeon under aseptic conditions and anaesthesia. Ten male Sprague Dawley rats were divided into two groups. In Group I, \"hernia repair\" was performed using 5.0 Silk. In Group II, polypropylene sutures (Prolene®; Ethicon, Somerville, N.J., USA) were used. All animals also received sham operations in the left groin as a control. After 14 days, the animals were euthanised and a segment of vas deferens just adjacent to the suture was excised for histological review by an experienced pathologist who was blind to the treatment groups of the respective specimens.
RESULTS: The body sizes of the rats in each group were comparable. Group I had significantly smaller vas deferens than Group II (diameter: 0.2 vs. 0.6 ± 0.2, p = 0.005). Silk sutures appeared to cause more tissue adhesion than Prolene® sutures, as graded by blind assessors (adhesion grade: 2.8 ± 1.3 vs. 1.8 ± 0.8, p = 0.1), although this did not reach statistical significance. There was no significant difference in the histological fibrosis score and inflammation score.
CONCLUSIONS: The only effect of non-absorbable sutures on vas deferens in this rat model was the reduced cross-sectional area of vas deferens and increased tissue adhesion when using silk sutures. However, there was no significant histological difference in inflammation or fibrosis caused by either material.
METHODS: All animal operations were performed by a single surgeon under aseptic conditions and anaesthesia. Ten male Sprague Dawley rats were divided into two groups. In Group I, \"hernia repair\" was performed using 5.0 Silk. In Group II, polypropylene sutures (Prolene®; Ethicon, Somerville, N.J., USA) were used. All animals also received sham operations in the left groin as a control. After 14 days, the animals were euthanised and a segment of vas deferens just adjacent to the suture was excised for histological review by an experienced pathologist who was blind to the treatment groups of the respective specimens.
RESULTS: The body sizes of the rats in each group were comparable. Group I had significantly smaller vas deferens than Group II (diameter: 0.2 vs. 0.6 ± 0.2, p = 0.005). Silk sutures appeared to cause more tissue adhesion than Prolene® sutures, as graded by blind assessors (adhesion grade: 2.8 ± 1.3 vs. 1.8 ± 0.8, p = 0.1), although this did not reach statistical significance. There was no significant difference in the histological fibrosis score and inflammation score.
CONCLUSIONS: The only effect of non-absorbable sutures on vas deferens in this rat model was the reduced cross-sectional area of vas deferens and increased tissue adhesion when using silk sutures. However, there was no significant histological difference in inflammation or fibrosis caused by either material.
摘要：
背景：腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术是儿童常用的手术。目前,单丝聚丙烯和编织丝是两种最常用的材料。研究表明，使用多丝不可吸收缝合线会引起更多的组织炎症反应。然而,关于缝合材料对邻近输精管的影响知之甚少。本实验的目的是比较腹腔镜疝修补术中不可吸收单丝和复丝缝线对输精管的影响。
方法:所有动物手术均由一名外科医生在无菌条件和麻醉下进行。将10只雄性SpragueDawley大鼠分为两组。在第一组中,使用5.0Silk进行“疝修补”。在第二组中，聚丙烯缝线(Prolene®;Ethicon,萨默维尔,N.J.,美国）被使用。所有动物也在左腹股沟接受假手术作为对照。14天后,对动物实施安乐死,并切除与缝合线相邻的输精管段,由经验丰富的病理学家进行组织学检查,该病理学家对各标本的治疗组视而不见.
结果：各组大鼠的体型相当。I组的输精管明显小于II组（直径：0.2vs.0.6±0.2，p=0.005）。与Prolene®缝合线相比，真丝缝合线似乎引起更多的组织粘连，由盲人评估员评分(粘连等级：2.8±1.3vs.1.8±0.8，p=0.1)，虽然没有达到统计学意义。组织学纤维化评分和炎症评分无显著差别。
结论：在该大鼠模型中，不可吸收缝线对输精管的唯一作用是使用丝线缝线时，输精管横截面积减小，组织粘连增加。然而,两种材料引起的炎症或纤维化均无显著组织学差异.
方法:所有动物手术均由一名外科医生在无菌条件和麻醉下进行。将10只雄性SpragueDawley大鼠分为两组。在第一组中,使用5.0Silk进行“疝修补”。在第二组中，聚丙烯缝线(Prolene®;Ethicon,萨默维尔,N.J.,美国）被使用。所有动物也在左腹股沟接受假手术作为对照。14天后,对动物实施安乐死,并切除与缝合线相邻的输精管段,由经验丰富的病理学家进行组织学检查,该病理学家对各标本的治疗组视而不见.
结果：各组大鼠的体型相当。I组的输精管明显小于II组（直径：0.2vs.0.6±0.2，p=0.005）。与Prolene®缝合线相比，真丝缝合线似乎引起更多的组织粘连，由盲人评估员评分(粘连等级：2.8±1.3vs.1.8±0.8，p=0.1)，虽然没有达到统计学意义。组织学纤维化评分和炎症评分无显著差别。
结论：在该大鼠模型中，不可吸收缝线对输精管的唯一作用是使用丝线缝线时，输精管横截面积减小，组织粘连增加。然而,两种材料引起的炎症或纤维化均无显著组织学差异.
