RESEARCH PAPER
Comparison of antibacterial-coated and non-coated suture material in intraoral surgery by isolation of adherent bacteria
 
More details
Hide details
1
Institute for Microbiology and Hygiene, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Freiburg, Germany
2
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Klaus Pelz   

Institute for Microbiology and Hygiene, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Freiburg, Germany
 
Ann Agric Environ Med. 2015;22(3):551–555
 
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
Objectives:
In general surgery the incidence of postoperative wound infections is reported to be lower using triclosan-coated sutures. In intraoral surgery, sutures are faced with different bacterial species and the question arises whether the antibacterial-coated suture material has the same positive effects.

Material and Methods:
Triclosan-coated and uncoated suture materials were applied in 17 patients undergoing wisdom tooth extraction. Postoperatively, sutures were removed and adherent bacteria were isolated, colony-forming units (cfu) were counted, and species identified.

Results:
Oral bacteria were found in high numbers (cfu>107) on both Vicryl and the triclosan-coated Vicryl Plus. The total number of bacteria isolated from Vicryl Plus was 37% higher than for Vicryl, mainly due to increased numbers of anaerobes. The number of bacterial strains identified was higher for Vicryl ( n=203) than for Vicryl Plus (n=198), but the number of pathogens was higher on Vicryl Plus (n=100) than on Vicryl (n=97). Fewer Gram-positive strains were found on Vicryl Plus (n=95) than on Vicryl (n=107) and, conversely, more Gram-negative strains on Vicryl Plus (103vs.96).

Conclusions:
In terms of the total number of oral bacteria, and especially oral pathogens, that adhered to suture material, no reduction was demonstrated for Vicryl Plus. The use of triclosan-coated suture material offers no advantage in intraoral surgery.

 
REFERENCES (16)
1.
Donlan RM, Costerton JW. Biofilms: survival mechanisms of clinically relevant microorganisms. J Clin Microbiol Rev. 2002; 15: 167–193.
 
2.
Giglio JA, Rowland RW, Dalton HP, Laskin DM. Suture removal-induced bacteremia: A possible endocarditis risk. J Am Dent Assoc. 1992; 123: 65–66, 69–70.
 
3.
King RC, Crawford JJ, Small EW. Bacteremia following intraoral suture removal. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1988; 65: 23–28.
 
4.
Otten JE, Wiedmann-Al-Ahmad M, Janke H, Pelz K. Bacterial colonization on different suture materials–a potential risk for intraoral dentoalveolar surgery. J Biomed Mat Res Part B: Appl Biomater. 2005; 74B: 627–635.
 
5.
Zhan C, Miller MR. Excess length of stay, charges, and mortality attributable to medical injuries during hospitalization. JAMA. 2003; 290: 1868–1874.
 
6.
Edmiston CHE, Seabrook GR, Gohen MP, Krepel CJ, Johnson ChP, Lewis BD, et al. Bacterial adherence to surgical sutures: Can antibacterial-coated sutures reduce the risk of microbial contamination? J Am Coll Surg. 2006; 203: 481–489.
 
7.
Rothenburger S, Spangler D, Bhende S, Burkley D. In vitro antimicrobial evaluation of coated VICRYL PLUS antibacterial suture using zone of inhibition assays. Surg Infect. 2002; (3 Suppl 1): 79–87.
 
8.
Storch M, Rothenburger SJ, Jacinto G. Experimental efficacy study of coated VICRYL plus antibacterial suture in guinea pig challenged with Staphylococcus aureus. Surg Infect. 2004; 5: 281–288.
 
9.
Rozzelle CJ, Leonardo J, Li V. Antimicrobial suture wound closure for cerebrospinal fluid shunt. J Neurosurg Pediatrics. 2008; 2: 111–117.
 
10.
Venema S, Abbas F, Van De Belt-Gritter B, Van Der Mei HC, Busscher HJ, Van Hoogmoed CG. In Vitro Oral Biofilm Formation on Triclosan-Coated Sutures in the Absence and Presence of Additional Antiplaque Treatment. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011; 69(4): 980–985. DOI:10.1016/j.joms.2010.02.030.
 
11.
Walker C, Borden LC, Zambon JJ, Bonta CY, De Vizio W, Volpe AR. The effects of a 0,3% triclosan-containing dentifrice on the microbial composition of supragingival plaque. J Clin Periodontol. 1994; 21: 334–341.
 
12.
Otten JE, Pelz K, Christmann G. Anaerobic bacteraemia following tooth extraction and removal of osteosynthesis plates. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1987; 45: 477–480.
 
13.
Gilbert T P, McBain AJ. Literature-based evaluation of the potential risks associated with impregnation of medical devices and implants with triclosan. Surg Infect. 2002; (3 Suppl 1): 55–63.
 
14.
Barbolt TA. Chemistry and safety of triclosan, and its use as an antimicrobial coating on coated VICRYL PLUS antibacterial suture. Surg Infect. 2002; (3Suppl 1): 45–55.
 
15.
Gomez-Alonso A, Garcia-Criado FJ, Parreno-Manchado FC, Garcia-Sanchez E, Garcia-Sanchez JE, Parreno-Manchado A, et al. Study of the efficacy of coated Vicryl Plus antibacterial suture in two animal models of general surgery. J Infect. 2007; 54: 82–88.
 
16.
Copitch JL, Whitehead RN, Webber MA. Prevalence of decreased susceptibility to triclosan in Salmonella enterica isolates from animals and humans and assosciation with multiple drug resistence. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2010; 36(3): 247–251.
 
eISSN:1898-2263
ISSN:1232-1966