...
【24h】

Comparison of wound-bursting strengths and surface characteristics of FDA-approved tissue adhesives for fkin closure

机译:FDA批准的用于闭合皮肤的组织粘合剂的刺突强度和表面特性比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

We compared the wound-bursting strength (WBS),mode of adhesive failure adn surface characteristics of two FDA-approved tissue adhesives for skin closure i an incisional rat model using a randomized,controlled,blind animal experiment.Standardized 2-cm full-thickness incisions were made in duplicate on both sides of 15 rats and closed with indermil,or high viscosity dermabond (HVD)following manufactures' instruction.WBS was measured 5 min later witha validated commercial instrument.Wound sectins were also observed under light and scanning electron microscopies.Indermil was significantly weaker than HVD (mean difference,143 mmHg;95%CI,42-229 mmHg,P=0.002).The mode of failure for indermil was primarily cohesive in the adhesive and the primary failure mode for the HVD was interfacial (X~2,P<0.01).Microscopic observations demonstrated that application of HVD resulted in a thick,uniform and smooth surface while indermil resulted in a thin,irregular,carcked surface.we conclde that hvd is stronger,thicker and more uniform than indermil.
机译:我们比较了两种FDA批准的用于皮肤闭合的组织粘合剂的创口强度(WBS),粘合剂失效模式和表面特性,在一项采用随机,对照,盲目的动物实验的切开大鼠模型中。标准的2厘米全厚度在15只大鼠的两侧切开一个切口,并按照制造商的说明用Indermil或高粘度皮粘结(HVD)封闭.5分钟后用经验证的商用仪器测量WBS。在光学和扫描电子显微镜下观察伤口的血凝素Indermil比HVD弱得多(平均差143 mmHg; 95%CI,42-229 mmHg,P = 0.002).Indermil的失效模式主要是粘合剂的内聚性,HVD的主要失效模式是界面的(X〜2,P <0.01)。显微镜观察表明,使用HVD可以产生厚,均匀和光滑的表面,而Indermil可以产生薄的,不规则的,有裂纹的表面。 ger,较厚,比indermil更均匀。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号