Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T12:53:39.063Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Surgical Adhesive/Soft Tissue Adhesion Measured by Pressurized Blister Test

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

Muriel L Braccini ,
Bertrand R.M. Perrin ,
Cécile Bidan  and
Michel Dupeux
Muriel L Braccini
Affiliation:
muriel.braccini@simap.grenoble-inp.frSIMaP – CNRS/Grenoble-INPSaint Martin d'Hères, France
Bertrand R.M. Perrin
Affiliation:
contact@bertrandperrin.comCHU GrenobleGrenoble, France
Cécile Bidan
Affiliation:
cecile.bidan@simap.grenoble-inp.frSIMaP – CNRS/Grenoble-INPSaint Martin d'Hères, France
Michel Dupeux
Affiliation:
michel.dupeux@siamp.grenoble-inp.frSIMaP – CNRS/Grenoble-INPSaint Martin d'Hères, France
Get access

Abstract

The practical adhesion of equine pericardium membranes bonded with surgical glue has been measured by the bulge-and-blister technique under injection of pressurized distilled water. The value of the interfacial crack propagation energy can be estimated from the critical debonding pressure. The measured practical adhesion energies are weak with regards to those of engineering structural adhesives, but they are reliable enough to allow a comparison between different surgical glues and a study of the influence of the bonding experimental conditions.

Keywords

adhesivetissueadhesion
Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 1274: Symposium QQ – Biological Materials and Structures in Physiologically Extreme Conditions and Disease , 2010 , 1274-QQ09-10
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Araki, M. Tao, H. Nakajima, N. Sugai, H. Sato, T. et al. , J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 134, 1241 (2007).Google Scholar
2 Jackson, M. Am J Surg 182, 1S (2001).Google Scholar
3 Bresnahan, K. Howell, J. Wizorek, J. Ann of Emerg Med 11, 2 (1995).Google Scholar
4 Ninan, L. Monahan, J. Stroshine, R. Wilker, J. Ninan, R. et al. , Biomaterials 24, 4091 (2003).Google Scholar
5 Shapiro, A. J., Dinsmore, R.C. North, J.H. Amer. Surg. 67 (11), 1113 (2001).Google Scholar
6 Lacombe, R. Adhesion Measurement Methods- Theory and Practice, edited by Taylor, and Francis, (CRC Press 2006) pp. 409–411 Google Scholar
7 Jensen, H.M. Engineering Fracture Mechanics 40, 475 (1991).Google Scholar
8 Hohlfelder, R., Luo, H. Vlassak, J. Chidsey, C. Nix, W. in Thin Films: Stresses and Mechanical Properties VI, edited by Gerberich, W. W. Gao, H. Sundgren, J.-E. Baker, S. P. (Mater. Res. Soc. Proc. 436, Pittsburg, PA, 1997) pp.115–120.Google Scholar
9 Perrin, B.R.M. Dupeux, M. Tozzi, P. Delay, D. Gersbach, P. Segesser, L.K. von, Eur J Cardio-Thorac 36, 967 (2009)Google Scholar
10 Lee, C-Y. Dupeux, M. Tuan, W-H., Mater Sci Eng A467, 125 (2007).Google Scholar
11 Artzi, N. Shazly, T. Baker, A.B. Bon, A. Edelman, E.R. Adv Mater 21, 3399 (2009).Google Scholar
12 Noort, R. van, Yates, S.P. Martin, T.R.P. Barker, A.T. Black, M.M. Biomaterials 3(1), 21 (1982).Google Scholar
13 Eick, J.D. Gwinnett, A.J. Pashley, D.H. and Robinson, S.J. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 8, 306 (1997).Google Scholar
14 Samule, N.T. Vailhén, E. Vailhé, C., Vetrecin, R. Liu, C. Maziarz, P.E. J. Biomater. Sci. Polymer Edn 19(1), 1455 (2008).Google Scholar