Is suture comparable to wire for cerclage fixation? A biomechanical analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Cerclage wire is the current standard for circumferential bone fixation. Advances in technology have improved modern sutures, allowing for expanded utility and broader application. The present study compared the strength and durability of cerclage fixation between modern suture materials and monofilament wire. Methods The Surgeon’s Knot, the Nice Knot and the Modified Nice Knot, were each tied using three separate suture materials: no. 2 FiberWire (Arthrex, Naples, FL, USA), no. 2 Ultrabraid (Smith & Nephew, Andover, MA, USA) and no. 5 Ethibond (Johnson & Johnson, Somerville, NJ, USA). These sutures were compared with monofilament wire. Sutures were secured around a fixed diameter using three additional half hitches, whereas a 1.2-mm (18 gauge) stainless steel monofilament wire was used for comparison. One fellow and one orthopaedic surgery resident each tied five trials with every knot/material combination. Samples were subjected to cyclic loading and quasi-static load testing. Respectively, cyclic displacement over time and load to failure were analyzed. Clinical failure (3 mm of cyclic displacement) and absolute failure (opening of the knot or material failure) were the outcomes of interest. Results During cyclic loading, Ethibond displaced significantly less over time compared to monofilament wire ( p < 0.003), whereas FiberWire showed no significant difference. Ultrabraid also behaved similar to wire, except displacing significantly more than wire only with the Surgeon’s Knot ( p = 0.02). During load to failure, Ethibond and FiberWire failed at significantly greater loads than monofilament wire ( p < 0.001), whereas Ultrabraid performed similar to wire. Knot types did not appear to impact the results. Conclusions High-performance sutures achieve superior results in biomechanical testing under cyclic and quasi-static load compared to monofilament wire, suggesting that they provide an alternative to wire for cerclage fixation with select clinical application. Biomechanical security of suture cerclage is dependent on suture material, although it is not altered significantly by choice of knot. An ex-vivo study with clinical application would further reinforce whether suture cerclage offers a valid alternative to wire cerclage.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".