The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  25 (2024)
Volume  24 (2023)
Volume  23 (2022)
Volume  22 (2021)
Volume  21 (2020)
Volume  20 (2019)
Volume  19 (2018)
Volume  18 (2017)
Volume  17 (2016)
Volume  16 (2015)
Volume  15 (2014)
Volume  14 (2013)
Volume  13 (2012)
Volume  12 (2011)
Volume  11 (2010)
Volume  10 (2009)
Volume  9 (2008)
Volume  8 (2007)
Volume  7 (2006)
Volume  6 (2005)
Volume  5 (2004)
Volume  4 (2003)
Volume  3 (2002)
Volume  2 (2001)
Volume  1 (1999)
Related articles

VOLUME 24 , ISSUE 8 ( August, 2023 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Evaluation of Microbial Adherence on Antibacterial Suture Materials during Intraoral Wound Healing: A Prospective Comparative Study

Ayisha Moonnam Kandathil, Sachin Aslam Aslam, Roshni Abidha, Mathew Pynummoottil Cherian, Manju Sudarsanan

Keywords : Antiseptic-impregnated sutures, Bacterial adherence, Triclosan-coated sutures, Wound healing

Citation Information : Kandathil AM, Aslam SA, Abidha R, Cherian MP, Sudarsanan M. Evaluation of Microbial Adherence on Antibacterial Suture Materials during Intraoral Wound Healing: A Prospective Comparative Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2023; 24 (8):515-520.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3553

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 13-09-2023

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2023; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim: To assess the efficacy of antiseptic-coated silk sutures with triclosan-coated polyglactin 910 suture in reducing bacterial colonization after oral surgical procedures. Materials and methods: The patients who required multiple sutures after surgical procedures in the mandible were the study subjects. The sites of suturing were divided into three groups. Group A – surgical site receiving black-braided silk suture (control group). Group B – surgical site receiving triclosan-coated Polyglactin 910 suture (experimental group). Group C – surgical site receiving antiseptic-coated silk suture (experimental group). Evaluation was done on the 3rd postoperative and 7th postoperative day. Microbial adherence was evaluated by microbiological study. Results: The mean comparison of microbial count between 3rd and 7th post-op day in the three groups shows an increased microbial colonization in the control group when compared with the experimental groups. The combined mean microbial adherence in the three groups showed microbial count in the uncoated silk suture (group A) as 10.35 ± 3.74, triclosan-coated suture (group B ) as 6.28 ± 2.17 and iodoform + calendula oil-coated suture (group C) as 7.1 ± 2.02 which is statistically significant (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The present research concluded that the pomade-coated silk suture is as efficient as triclosan-coated VICRYL PLUS Polyglactin 910 sutures in reducing the bacterial colonization in intraoral wound healing. Clinical significance: The pomade (iodoform + calendula oil) may be advocated in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery for impregnating the suture materials which act as an antiseptic agent and a promoter of wound healing which is easily accessible and also cost-effective.

HTML PDF Share
  1. Andersson L, Kahnberg KE, Pogrel MA, editors. Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex , PO198SQ, United Kingdom; 2012.
  2. Hupp JR, Tucker MR, Ellis E. Contemporary Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery-E-book. Elsevier B.V. Registered Office: Radarweg 29, 1043 NX Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Registered in The Netherlands; 2013.
  3. Araújo MG, Silva CO, Misawa M, et al. Alveolar socket healing: What can we learn? Periodontology 2000. 2015;68(1):122–134. DOI: 10.1111/prd.12082.
  4. Chhabra S, Chhabra N, Kaur A, et al. Wound healing concepts in clinical practice of OMFS. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 2017;16(4):403–423. DOI: 10.1007/s12663-016-0880-z.
  5. Pérez SS, Ramírez ML, Borgarello MQ, et al. Antibacterial suture vs silk for the surgical removal of impacted lower third molars. A randomized clinical study. Medicina oral, patología oral y cirugía bucal. Ed. inglesa. 2016;21(1):11. DOI: 10.4317/medoral.20721.
  6. National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) report, data summary from October 1986–April 1996, issued May 1996. A report from the National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) System. Am J Infect Control. 1996;24:380–388. PMID: 8902113.
  7. Cruz F, Leite F, Cruz G, et al. Sutures coated with antiseptic pomade to prevent bacterial colonization: a randomized clinical trial. Oral surgery, oral medicine. Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2013;116(2):e103–e109. DOI: 10.1016/j.oooo.2011.12.016.
  8. King RC, Crawford JJ, Small EW. Bacteremia following intraoral suture removal. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1988;65:23–28. DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(88)90185-5.
  9. Cruz M, Castro JM. Effectiveness of iodoform antiseptic pomade in the control of bacterial dental implant-abutment interface contamination: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Int J Oral Sci. 2001;14(1):1–4. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260071444_Effectiveness_of_Iodoform_Antiseptic_Pomade_in_the_Control_of_Bacterial_Dental_Implant-Abutment_Interface_Contamination_A_Randomized_Clinical_Trial.
  10. Masini BD, Stinner DJ, Waterman SM, et al. Bacterial adherence to suture materials. J Surg Educ 2011;68(2):101–104. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsurg.2010.09.015.
  11. Deliaert AE, Van den Kerckhove E, Tuinder S, et al. The effect of triclosan-coated sutures in wound healing. A double blind randomised prospective pilot study. J Plastic, Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2009;62(6):771–773. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2007.10.075.
  12. Pelz K, Todtmann N, Otten JE. Comparison of antibacterial-coated and non-coated suture material in intraoral surgery by isolation of adherent bacteria. Annals of Agricultural and Environmental Medicine. 2015;22(3):551–555. DOI: 10.5604/12321966.1167733.
  13. Venema S, Abbas F, Van de Belt-Gritter B, et al. In vitro oral biofilm formation on triclosan-coated sutures in the absence and presence of additional antiplaque treatment. J Oral Maxil Surg 2011; 69:980–985. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2010.02.030.
  14. Storch M, Perry LC, Davidson JM, et al. A 28-day study of the effect of Coated VICRYL* Plus Antibacterial Suture (coated polyglactin 910 suture with triclosan) on wound healing in guinea pig linear incisional skin wounds. Surgical Infections. 2002;3(S1):s89–98. DOI: 10.1089/sur.2002.3.s1-89.
  15. Ming X, Nichols M, Rothenburger S. In vivo antibacterial efficacy of MONOCRYL plus antibacterial suture (Poliglecaprone 25 with triclosan). Surgical Infections. 2007;8(2):209–214. DOI: 10.1089/sur.2006.004.
  16. Sh ME, Rahgozar S, Tajmiri G, et al. Microbiological evaluation of the antibacterial Vicryl suture in the mandibular third molar surgery. J Oro-fac Sci 2022;14:120–127. DOI: 10.4103/jofs.jofs_131_22.
  17. Hoshino S, Yoshida Y, Tanimura S, et al. A study of the efficacy of antibacterial sutures for surgical site infection: a retrospective controlled trial. Int Surg 2013;98(2):129–132. DOI: 10.9738/CC179.
  18. Sewlikar SA, Pillai RS, Mahajan NS, et al. Triclosan coated sutures: an overview of safety and efficacy in reducing risk of surgical site infection. Int Surg J 2016;2(1):1–7. DOI: 10.5455/2349-2902.isj20150201.
  19. Tabrizi R, Mohajerani H, Bozorgmehr F. Polyglactin 910 suture compared with polyglactin 910 coated with triclosan in dental implant surgery: randomized clinical trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2019;48(10):1367–1371. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2019.01.011.
  20. Guo J, Pan LH, Li YX, et al. Efficacy of triclosan-coated sutures for reducing risk of surgical site infection in adults: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. J Surg Res 2016;201(1):105–117. DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2015.10.015.
  21. Chu CC, Williams DF. Effects of physical configuration and chemical structure of suture materials on bacterial adhesion: a possible link to wound infection. Amer J Surg 1994;147(2):197–204. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9610(84)90088-6.
  22. Wright KJ, Barbosa SV, Araki K, et al. In vitro antimicrobial and cytotoxic effects of Kri 1 paste and zinc oxide-eugenol used in primary tooth pulpectomies. Pediatric dentistry. 1994;16(2):102–106. PMID: 8015949.
  23. Rothenburger S, Spangler D, Bhende S, et al. In vitro antimicrobial evaluation of Coated VICRYL* Plus Antibacterial Suture (coated polyglactin 910 with triclosan) using zone of inhibition assays. Surg Infect 2002;3(S1):s79–87. DOI: 10.1089/sur.2002.3.s1-79.
  24. Moore LE. Evaluation of the Risks Associated with Long-Term Use of Cationic Antimicrobials. The University of Manchester (United Kingdom); 2005.
  25. Barbolt TA. Chemistry and safety of triclosan, and its use as an antimicrobial coating on Coated VICRYL Plus Antibacterial Suture (coated polyglactin 910 suture with triclosan). Surg Infect 2002;3(S1):s45–53. DOI: 10.1089/sur.2002.3.s1-45.
  26. Parirokh M, Asgary S, Eghbal MJ, et al. A scanning electron microscope study of plaque accumulation on silk and PVDF suture materials in oral mucosa. Int Endodont J 2004;37(11):776–781. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2004.00873.x.
  27. Banche G, Roana J, Mandras N, et al. Microbial adherence on various intraoral suture materials in patients undergoing dental surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007;65(8):1503–1507. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2006.10.066.
  28. Mortazavi M, Mesbahi M. Comparison of zinc oxide and eugenol, and Vitapex for root canal treatment of necrotic primary teeth. Int J Paediat Dent 2004;14(6):417–424. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-263X.2004.00544.x.
  29. Grigg TR, Liewehr FR, Patton WR, et al. Effect of the wicking behavior of multifilament sutures. Journal of Endodontics. 2004;30(9):649–652. DOI: 10.1097/01.don.0000121617.67923.05.
  30. Ford HR, Jones P, Gaines B, et al. Intraoperative handling and wound healing: controlled clinical trial comparing coated VICRYL® Plus antibacterial suture (coated polyglactin 910 suture with triclosan) with Coated VICRYL® suture (coated polyglactin 910 suture). Surgical infections. 2005;6(3):313–321. DOI: 10.1089/sur.2005.6.313.
  31. Viju S, Thilagavathi G. Characterization of tetracycline hydrochloride drug incorporated silk sutures. J Textile Institute. 2013;104(3):289–294. DOI: 10.1080/00405000.2012.720758.
  32. Kuga MC, Faria G, So MV, et al. The impact of the addition of iodoform on the physicochemical properties of an epoxy-based endodontic sealer. J Appl Oral Sci 2014;22(2):125–130. DOI: 10.1590/1678-775720130052.
  33. Preethi KC, Kuttan R. Wound healing activity of flower extract of Calendula offlcinalis. J Basic Clin Physiol Pharmacol 2009;20(1):73–80. DOI: 10.1515/jbcpp.2009.20.1.73.
  34. Sortino F, Lombardo C, Sciacca A. Silk and polyglycolic acid in oral surgery: a comparative study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008;105(3):e15–e18. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2007.09.019.
  35. Marzo G, Loffredi R, Marchetti E, et al. In vitro antibacterial efficacy of Vicryl Plus suture (coated Polyglactin 910 with triclosan) using zone of inibition assays. Oral implantol 2008;1(1):43–48. PMID: 23285335.
  36. Ming X, Rothenburger S, Nichols MM. In vivo and in vitro antibacterial efficacy of PDS plus (polidioxanone with triclosan) suture. Surg Infect 2008;9(4):451–457. DOI: 10.1089/sur.2007.061.
  37. Justinger C, Moussavian MR, Schlueter C, et al. Antibiotic coating of abdominal closure sutures and wound infection. Surgery 2009;145(3):330–334. DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2008.11.007.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.