Skip to main content
Log in

Maximum tensile force of different suture techniques in reconstruction of the renal remnant after nephron-sparing surgery

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

In nephron-sparing surgery, the closure of the renal remnant is one of the major critical steps in preventing possible complications. Several suture techniques can be used for this purpose. The type of suture used depends on the discretion of the surgeon and not on validated experimental data.

Methods

In an experimental setting, the renal remnant of a standardized defect in 20 porcine kidneys (with and without an intact renal capsule) was reconstructed using three different suture techniques (simple, vertical, and horizontal mattress suture). The maximum tensile force before the suture tears through the renal remnant was recorded.

Results

The horizontal mattress suture attains the highest maximum tensile force by far. The values of the simple and vertical mattress sutures are surpassed, with a respective increase of 140 and 83% if the capsule is intact and 172 and 109% if the capsule is not intact. If an intact renal capsule is present, the maximum tensile force in each suture technique increases 43–63%.

Conclusions

The data suggest that of all tested suture techniques, the horizontal mattress suture provides the best adaptation strength before the suture tears through the renal parenchyma/capsule. Furthermore, it is recommended that the kidney capsule be included in the reconstructive suture because this significantly contributes to the safety of the procedure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Uzzo RG, Novick AC (2001) Nephron-sparing surgery for renal tumors: indications, techniques, and outcomes. J Urol 1:6–18

    Google Scholar 

  2. Gill IS, Desai MM, Kaouk JH, Meraney AM, Murphy DP, Sung GT, Novick AC (2002) Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal tumor: duplicating open surgical techniques. J Urol 2(Pt. 1):469–476 (discussion 475–476)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Zincke H, Ruckle HC (1995) Use of exogenous material to bolster closure of the parenchymal defect following partial nephrectomy. Urology 1:96–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Janetschek G (2007) Radical and partial nephrectomy for RCC: laparoscopy or open surgery. Urologe A 5:496–503

    Google Scholar 

  5. Mulholland TL, See WA (1998) Pledgeted sutures for parenchymal compression facilitate partial nephrectomy. Br J Urol 4:630–633

    Google Scholar 

  6. Wandschneider G (1968) A contribution on the suture technic in partial kidney resections. Zentralbl Chir 32:1102–1106

    Google Scholar 

  7. Snedeker JG, Barbezat M, Niederer P, Schmidlin FR, Farshad M (2005) Strain energy density as a rupture criterion for the kidney: impact tests on porcine organs, finite element simulation, and a baseline comparison between human and porcine tissues. J Biomech 5:993–1001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Snedeker JG, Niederer P, Schmidlin FR, Farshad M, Demetropoulos CK, Lee JB, Yang KH (2005) Strain-rate-dependent material properties of the porcine and human kidney capsule. J Biomech 5:1011–1021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Mabjeesh NJ, Avidor Y, Matzkin H (2004) Emerging nephron-sparing treatments for kidney tumors: a continuum of modalities from energy ablation to laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. J Urol 2(Pt 1):553–560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hafez KS, Fergany AF, Novick AC (1999) Nephron-sparing surgery for localized renal cell carcinoma: impact of tumor size on patient survival, tumor recurrence, and TNM staging. J Urol 6:1930–1933

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lerner SE, Hawkins CA, Blute ML, Grabner A, Wollan PC, Eickholt JT, Zincke H (1996) Disease outcome in patients with low-stage renal cell carcinoma treated with nephron-sparing or radical surgery. J Urol 6:1868–1873

    Google Scholar 

  12. Lee CT, Katz J, Shi W, Thaler HT, Reuter VE, Russo P (2000) Surgical management of renal tumors 4 cm or less in a contemporary cohort. J Urol 3:730–736

    Google Scholar 

  13. Leibovich BC, Blute ML, Cheville JC, Lohse CM, Weaver AL, Zincke H (2004) Nephron-sparing surgery for appropriately selected renal cell carcinoma between 4 and 7 cm results in outcome similar to radical nephrectomy. J Urol 3:1066–1070

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Lane BR, Gill IS (2007) 5-Year outcomes of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. J Urol 1:70–74 (discussion 74)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Permpongkosol S, Bagga HS, Romero FR, Sroka M, Jarrett TW, Kavoussi LR (2006) Laparoscopic versus open partial nephrectomy for the treatment of pathological T1N0M0 renal cell carcinoma: a 5-year survival rate. J Urol 5:1984–1988 discussion 1988–1989

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

We acknowledge the technical assistance of Mrs. Patrizia Horny during the mechanical testing.

Disclosures

J. Simon, F. Finter, A. Ignatius, M. Meilinger, and L. Dürselen have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Simon.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Simon, J., Finter, F., Ignatius, A. et al. Maximum tensile force of different suture techniques in reconstruction of the renal remnant after nephron-sparing surgery. Surg Endosc 25, 503–507 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1201-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1201-0

Keywords

Navigation