Is there an evidence-based argument for embracing an antimicrobial (triclosan)-coated suture technology to reduce the risk for surgical-site infections?: A meta-analysis

Surgery (United States)

Volumn 154, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 89-100

  Edmiston Jr , Charles E ^a   Daoud, Frederic C ^b   Leaper, David ^c  

^a MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN   (United States)

^b Medextens ^*  (France)

^c IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

TRICLOSAN; TOPICAL ANTIINFECTIVE AGENT;

ANTIBIOTIC THERAPY; ARTICLE; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; DRUG EFFICACY; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; HUMAN; INFECTION PREVENTION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MATERIAL COATING; META ANALYSIS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SURGICAL INFECTION; SURGICAL PATIENT; SUTURE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TREATMENT OUTCOME; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); SUTURING METHOD;

ANTI-INFECTIVE AGENTS, LOCAL; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; SURGICAL WOUND INFECTION; SUTURE TECHNIQUES; SUTURES; TRICLOSAN;

EID: 84880274476     PISSN: 00396060     EISSN: 15327361     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2013.03.008     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Zhan C, Miller MR. Excess length of stay, charges, and mortality attributable to medical injuries during hospitalization. JAMA 2003;290:1868-74. (Pubitemid 37430603)
2. Horan TC, Gaynes RP, Martone WJ, et al. CDC definitions of nosocomial surgical site infections, 1992: a modification of CDC definitions of surgical wound infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1992;13:606-8.
3. Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR. Guidelines for Prevention of Surgical Site Infection. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Hospital Infection Control Practice Advisory Committee. Am J Infect Control 1999;27:97-132.
4. Cullen KA, Hall MJ, Golosinskiy A. Ambulatory Surgery in the United States, 2006. National Health Statistics Report No. 11, Revised. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics; 2009. Available athttp://www.cdc.gov/ nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr011.pdf.
5. Varma S, Ferguson HC, Breen DV, Lumb WV. Comparison of seven suture materials in infected wounds: an experimental study. J Surg Res 1974;17:165-70.
6. Elek SD, Cohen PE. The virulence of S. pyogenes for man: a study of the problems of wound infection. Br J Exp Pathol 1957;38:573-86.
7. Raju DR, Jindrak K, Weiner M, Enquist IF. A study of the critical bacterial inoculums to cause a stimulus to wound healing. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1977;144:347-50. (Pubitemid 8198657)
8. Leaper DJ. Risk factors for surgical infections. J Hosp Infect 1995;30:S127-39.
9. Edmiston CE, Spencer M, Lewis BD, et al. Reducing the risk of surgical site infections: did we really think that SCIP would lead us to the promised land? Surg Infect 2011;12:169-77.
10. Masini BD, Stinner DJ, Waterman SM, et al. Bacterial adherence to suture material. J Surg Education 2011;68:101-4.
11. Bryers JD. Medical biofilms. Biotechnol Bioeng 2008;100:1-18. (Pubitemid 351579011)
12. Edmiston CE. Prosthetic device infections in surgery. In: Nichols RL, Nyhus LM, editors. Update of surgical sepsis. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott; 1993. p. 444-68.
13. Bamber AI, Neal TJ. An assessment of triclosan susceptibility against methicillin-resistant and methicilin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus. J Hosp Infect 1999;41:107-9. (Pubitemid 29084004)
14. Jones RD, Jampani HB, Newmann JL, et al. Triclosan: a review of effectiveness and safety in healthcare settings. Am J Infect Control 2000;28:184-96. (Pubitemid 30226494)
15. Bhargava HN, Leonard PA. Triclosan: application and safety. Am J Infect Control 1996;24:209-18.
16. Rothenburger S, Spangler D, Bhende S, et al. In vitro antimicrobial evaluation of coated Vicryl Plus antibacterial sutures (coated polyglactin 910 with triclosan) using zone of inhibition assay. Surg Infect 2002;3:S79-87.
17. Leaper D, Assadian O, Huber NO, et al. Antimicrobial sutures and prevention of surgical site infection: assessment of the safety of triclosan. Int Wound J 2011;8:556-66.
18. 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 with triclosan) with coated Vicryl suture (coated Polyglactin 910 suture). Surg Infect 2005;6:313-21. (Pubitemid 41645597)
19. Rozzelle CJ, Leonardo J, Li V. Antimicrobial suture wound closure for cerebrospinal fluid shunt surgery: a prospective, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial. J Neurosurg Pediatr 2008;2:111-7.
20. Mingmalairak C, Ungbhakorn P, Paocharoen V. Efficacy of antimicrobial coating suture coated polyglactin 910 with triclosan (Vicryl Plus) compared with polyglactin 910 (Vicryl) in reduced surgical site infection of appendicitis, doubleblind randomized control trial, preliminary safety report. J Med Assoc Thai 2009;92:770-5.
21. Zhuang CP, Cai GY, Wang YQ. Comparison of two absorbable sutures in abdominal wall incision. J Clin Rehab Tiss Eng Res 2009;13:4045-8; Available at http://www.crter.cn CRTER.
22. Zhang ZT, Zhang HW, Fang XD, et al. Pilot evaluation of cosmetic outcome and surgical site infection rates of coated Vicryl*Plus antibacterial (polyglactin 910) suture compared to Chinese silk in scheduled breast cancer surgery. Chin Med J 2011;124:719-24.
23. Galal I, El-Hindawy K. Impact of using triclosanantibacterial sutures on incidence of surgical site infection. Am J Surg 2011;202:133-8.
24. Rasic Z, Schwarz D, Adam VN, et al. Efficacy of antimicrobial triclosan-coated polyglactin 910 (Vicryl*Plus) suture for closure of the abdominal wall after colorectal surgery. Coll Antropol 2011;35:439-43.
25. Williams N, Sweetland H, Goyal S, et al. Randomized trial of antimicrobial-coated sutures to prevent surgical site infection after breast cancer surgery. Surg Infect 2011;12:469-74.
26. Baracs J, Huszár O, Sajjadi SG, et al. Surgical site infections after abdominal closure in colorectal surgery using triclosan-coated absorbable suture (PDS Plus) vs. uncoated sutures (PDS II): a randomized multicenter study. Surg Infect 2011;12:483-9.
27. Turtainen J, Saimanen EI, Mäkinen KT, et al. Effect of triclosan-coated sutures on the incidence of surgical wound infection after lower limb revascularization surgery: a randomized controlled trial. World J Surg 2012;36:2528-34.
28. Seim BE, Tønnessen T, Woldbaek PR. Triclosan-coated sutures do not reduce leg wound infections after coronary artery bypass grafting. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2012; 15:411-5.
29. Isik I, Selimen D, Senay S, et al. Efficiency of antibacterial suture material in cardiac surgery: a double-blind randomized prospective study. Heart Surg Forum 2012;15:E40-5.
30. Nakamura T, Kashimura N, Noji T, et al. Triclosan-coated sutures reduce the incidence of wound infection and cost after colorectal surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Surgery 2013;153:576-83.
31. Chang WR, Srinivasa S, Morton R, et al. Triclosan-impregnated sutures to decrease surgical site infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Ann Surg 2012;255:854-9.
32. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. v. 5.1.0 updated March 2011. Available at http://www.cochrane- handbook.org.
33. Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. University of Oxford, UK. Available at http://www.cebm.net.
34. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, et al. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997;315:629-34. (Pubitemid 27387172)
35. Egger M, Davey Smith G. Bias in location and selection of studies. BMJ 1998;316:61-6.
36. Sterne JAC, Egger M, Davey Smith G. Investigating and dealing with publication and other biases. In: Egger M, Davey Smith G, Altman DG, editors. Systematic reviews in health care: meta-analysis in context. London: BMJ Publishing Group; 2001. p. 189-208.
37. Defazio A, Datta M, Nezhat C. Does the use of Vicryl Plus antibacterial suture decrease the incidence of umbilical infection when compared to Vicryl suture? Fertil Steril 2005; 84(Suppl 1):S161; 29.
38. Deliaert AE, Van den Kerckhove E, Tuinder S, et al. The effect of triclosan-coated sutures in wound healing: a doubleblind randomized prospective pilot study. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2009;62:771-3.
39. Picó RB, Jimenez LA, Sanchez MC, et al. Prospective study comparing the incidence of wound infection following appendectomy for acute appendicitis in children: conventional treatment versus using reabsorbable antibacterial suture or gentamicin-impregnated collagen fleeces. Cir Pediatr 2008;21:199-202.
40. Justinger C, Moussavian MR, Schlueter C, et al. Antibiotic coating of abdominal closure sutures and wound infection. Surgery 2009;145:330-4.
41. Fleck T, Moidl R, Blacky A, et al. Triclosan-coated sutures for the reduction of sterna wound infections: economic considerations. Ann Thorac Surg 2007;84:232-6. (Pubitemid 46921148)
42. Justinger C, Schiuld J, Sperling J, et al. Triclosan-coated sutures reduce wound infections after hepatobiliary surgery: a prospective, non-randomized clinical pathway study. Lagenbecks Arch Surg 2011;396:845-50.
43. Kathju S, Nistico L, Lasko LA, et al. Bacterial biofilm on monofilament suture and porcine xenograft after inguinal herniorrhaphy. FEMS Immunol Med MIcrobiol 2010;59:405-9.
44. Wells C, Henry-Stanley MJ, Barnes AMT, et al. Relation between antibiotic susceptibility and ultrastructure of Staphylococcus aureus on surgical suture. Surg Infect 2011;12:297-305.
45. Kathju S, Nistico L, Hall-Stoodly L, et al. Chronic surgical site infection due to suture-associated polymicrobial biofilm. Surg Infect 2009;10:457-61.
46. Kathju S, Lasko LA, Nistico L, et al. Cutaneous fistula from gastric remnant resulting from a chronic suture-associated biofilm infection. Obes Surg 2010;20:251-6.
47. Edmiston CE, Seabrook GR, Cambria RA, et al. Molecular epidemiology of microbial contamination in the operating room environment: is there a risk for infection? Surgery 2005;138:573-82. (Pubitemid 41546177)
48. Misteli H, Weber WP, Reck S, et al. Surgical glove perforation and the risk of surgical site infection. Arch Surg 2009;144:553-8.
49. Edmiston CE, Krepel CJ, Marks RM, et al. Microbiology of explanted suture segments from infected and noninfected surgical cases. J Clin Microbiol 2013;51:417-21.
50. Hasanadka R, Seabrook GR, Edmiston CE. Vascular graft infections. In: Rello J, Vanes J, Kollef M, editors. Critical care of infectious diseases. 2nd ed. Boston: Kluwer Academic; 2007.
51. Frei E, Hodgkiss-Harlow K, Rossi PJ, et al. Microbial pathogenesis of microbial biofilms: a causative factor of vascular surgical site infection. Vasc Endovasc Surg 2011;45:688-96.
52. Suller MTE, Russell AD. Triclosan and antibiotic resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. J Antimicrob Chemother 2000; 46:11-8. (Pubitemid 30466190)
53. Aiello AE, Marshall B, Levy SB, et al. Relationship between triclosan and susceptibility to bacteria isolates from hands in the community. Antimicrob Agent Chemother 2004;48:2973-89.
54. Leaper D, McBain AJ, Kramer A, et al. Healthcare-associated infection: novel strategies and antimicrobial implants to prevent surgical site infection. Ann Royal Coll Surg Eng 2010;92:453-8.
55. Stone J, Gruber TJ, Rozzelle CJ. Healthcare savings associated with reduced infection rates using antimicrobial suture wound closure for cerebrospinal fluid shunt surgery. Pediatr Neurosurg 2010;46:19-24.
56. Hawn MT, Vick CC, Richman J, et al. Surgical site infection prevention: Time to move beyond the surgical care improvement program. Ann Surg 2011;254:494-9.
57. Weston A, Caldera K, Doron S. Surgical care improvement project is the value-based purchasing era: more harm than good? Clin Infect Dis 2013;56:424-7.