Mechanics of Composite Materials

, Volume 55, Issue 3, pp 405–412 | Cite as

Stress State and Optimization of the Parameters of Interrupted and Machine Surgical Sutures of Human Intestine

  • R. A. TurusovEmail author
  • V. I. Egorov

For the first time, an approximate solution of the problem on the stress state of one of the main types of medical suture — an interrupted or an identical machine suture — is suggested with the example of human intestinal anastomosis.


stresses Young’s modulus tensile stress–strain diagram of intestin wall intestinal anastomosis interrupted and machine surgical sutures suture parameter optimization edema 


  1. 1.
    T. T. Irvin and J. C. Goligher, “Aetiology of disruption of intestinal anastomoses,” Br. J. Surg., No. 60, 461-464 (1973).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. K. Jex, J. A. Van Heerden, and B. G. Wolf, “Gastrointestinal anastomoses: Factors affecting early complications,” Ann. Surg., No. 206, 138-141 (1987).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    I. D. Kirpatovskii, Theoretical bases of a gastroenteric suture, Diss. Dr. med sciences (1960).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    G. N. Ballantine, “The experimental basis of intestinal suturing. Effect of surgical technique, inflamation, and infection on enteric wound healing,” Dis. Colon Rectum, 27, No. 1, 61-71 (1984).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. Waninger, G. W. Kauffmann, I. A. Shah, and E. H. Farthmann, “Influence of the distance between interupted sutures and the tension of sutures on the healing of experimental colonic anastomoses,” Am. J. Surg., No. 163, 319-323 (1992).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. C. Goligher, N. G. Graham, and F. T. De Dombal, “Anastomotic dehiscence after anterior resection of rectum and sigmoid,” Br. J. Surg., No. 57, 109-118 (1970).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    H. L. Young and M. N. Wheeler, “Results of prospective randomized double-blind trial of aprotinin in colonic surgery,” World J. Surg., No. 8, 367-373 (1984).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    G. Gabella, “The cross-ply arrangement of collagen fibers in the submucosa of the mammalian small intestine,” Cell Tissue Res., No. 248, 491-497 (1987).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    V. I. Egorov, I. V., Schastlivtsev, E. V. Prut, A. O. Baranov, and R. A Turusov, “Mechanical properties of the human gastrointestinal tract,” J. Biomechanics, No. 35, 1417-1425 (2002).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. A. Turusov, V. I. Egorov, I. V. Schastlivtsev, A. O. Baranov, and E. V. Prut, “Mechanical biological aspects of the problem on an intestinal anastomosis of humans,” Mekh. Kompoz. Mater. Konstr., Т. 5, No. 4, 109-135 (1999).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    V. I. Egorov, I. V. Schastlivtsev, R. A. Turusov, and A. O. Baranov, “Mechanical pressure under the thread of an intestinal suture as the reason for microcirculation infringements in the area of fistula,” Annaly Khirurg., No. 3, 62-74 (2002).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    V. I. Egorov, I. V., Schastlivtsev, E. V. Prut, A. O. Baranov, and R. A Turusov, “Biomechanical aspects of the problem of reliability of human intestinal anastomosis,” Composites: Mechanics, Computations, Application, An Int. J. 7, No. 3, 201-231 (2016). –Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    W. S. Halsted, “Blind end circulare suture of the intestine, closed ends abutted and the double diaphragm punctured with a knife introduced per rectum,” Annals Surg., No. 75, P. 356-364 (1922).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Chemical Physics of the Russian Academy of SciencesMoscowRussia
  2. 2.Moscow City Clinical Hospital № 5MoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations