Top

BMC Surgery

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research article

Comparison of intraoperative handling and wound healing between (NEOSORB® plus) and coated polyglactin 910 suture (NEOSORB®): a prospective, single-blind, randomized controlled trial

Authors: Bum Sik Tae, Ju Hyun Park, Jung Kwon Kim, Ja Hyeon Ku, Cheol Kwak, Hyeon Hoe Kim, Chang Wook Jeong

Published in: BMC Surgery | Issue 1/2018

Abstract

Background

Coated polyglactin 910 suture with chlorhexidine (NEOSORB® Plus) has recently been developed to imbue the parent suture with antibacterial activity against organisms that commonly cause surgical site infections (SSI). This prospective, single-blinded, randomized trial, was performed to compare the intraoperative handling and wound healing characteristics of NEOSORB® Plus with those of the traditional polyglactin 910 suture (NEOSORB®) in urologic surgery patients.

Methods

Patients (aged 19 to 80 years, n = 100) were randomized in a 1:1 ratio for treatment with either NEOSORB® Plus or NEOSORB®, and stratified into an open surgery or a minimally invasive surgery group. The primary endpoint was the assessment of overall intraoperative handling of the sutures. Secondary endpoints included specific intraoperative handling measures and wound healing characteristics. Wound healing was assessed at one and 11 days after surgery. Cumulative skin infection, seroma, and suture sinus events within 30 days after surgery were also evaluated.

Results

A total of 96 patients were included, with 47 patients in the NEOSORB® Plus group and 49 patients in the NEOSORB® group. Scores for intraoperative handling were favorable and were not significantly different between the two suture groups. Wound healing characteristics were also comparable. The incidence of adverse events was 13.6%, although none were deemed attributable to the suture, and no difference was observed between the two groups.

Conclusions

NEOSORB® Plus is not inferior to traditional sutures in terms of intraoperative handling and wound healing, potentially making NEOSORB® Plus a beneficial alternative for patients at increased risk of SSI.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02431039. Trial registration date 14 August 2015.

Available only for authorised users

Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Hospital infection control practices advisory committee. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999;20(4):250–78.CrossRefPubMed

Ford HR, Jones P, Gaines B, Reblock K, Simpkins DL. 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). Surg Infect. 2005;6(3):313–21.CrossRef

Hranjec T, Swenson BR, Sawyer RG. Surgical site infection prevention: how we do it. Surg Infect. 2010;11(3):289–94.CrossRef

Bhargava H, Leonard PA. Triclosan: applications and safety. Am J Infect Control. 1996;24(3):209–18.CrossRefPubMed

Guo J, Pan L-H, Li Y-X, Yang X-D, Li L-Q, Zhang C-Y, Zhong J-H. 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):105–17.CrossRefPubMed

Aiello AE, Larson EL, Levy SB. Consumer antibacterial soaps: effective or just risky? Clin Infect Dis. 2007;45(Supplement 2):S137–47.CrossRefPubMed

Yazdankhah SP, Scheie AA, Høiby EA, Lunestad B-T, Heir E, Fotland TØ, Naterstad K, Kruse H. Triclosan and antimicrobial resistance in bacteria: an overview. Microb Drug Resist. 2006;12(2):83–90.CrossRefPubMed

Russell A, Day M. Antibacterial activity of chlorhexidine. J Hosp Infect. 1993;25(4):229–38.CrossRefPubMed

Arnold RR, Wei HH, Simmons E, Tallury P, Barrow DA, Kalachandra S. Antimicrobial activity and local release characteristics of chlorhexidine diacetate loaded within the dental copolymer matrix, ethylene vinyl acetate. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2008;86((2):506–13.CrossRef

10.

Huynh TT, Padois K, Sonvico F, Rossi A, Zani F, Pirot F, Doury J, Falson F. Characterization of a polyurethane-based controlled release system for local delivery of chlorhexidine diacetate. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2010;74(2):255–64.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Fong N, Simmons A, Poole-Warren LA. Antibacterial polyurethane nanocomposites using chlorhexidine diacetate as an organic modifier. Acta Biomater. 2010;6(7):2554–61.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Koburger T, Hübner NO, Braun M, Siebert J, Kramer A. Standardized comparison of antiseptic efficacy of triclosan, PVP-iodine, octenidine dihydrochloride, polyhexanide and chlorhexidine digluconate. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2010;65(8):1712–9.CrossRefPubMed

13.

McDonnell G, Russell AD. Antiseptics and disinfectants: activity, action, and resistance. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1999;12(1):147–79.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

14.

Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, Group C. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. PLoS Med. 2010;7(3):e1000251.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gøtzsche PC, Devereaux P, Elbourne D, Egger M, Altman DG. CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(8):e1–e37.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Boni L, Benevento A, Rovera F, Dionigi G, Di Giuseppe M, Bertoglio C, Dionigi R. Infective complications in laparoscopic surgery. Surg Infect. 2006;7:S109–11.CrossRef

17.

Weinstein RA. Nosocomial infection update. Emerg Infect Dis. 1998;4(3):416–20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Fry DE. The economic costs of surgical site infection. Surg Infect. 2002;3:S37–43.CrossRef

19.

Park YY, Kim CW, Park SJ, Lee KY, Lee JJ, Lee HO, Lee SH. Influence of shorter duration of prophylactic antibiotic use on the incidence of surgical site infection following colorectal Cancer surgery. Ann Coloproctol. 2015;31(6):235–42.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) hospital infection control practices advisory committee. Am J Infect Control. 1999;27(2):97–132.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Owens CD, Stoessel K. Surgical site infections: epidemiology, microbiology and prevention. Journal of Hospital Infection. 2008;70:3–10.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Rothenburger S, Spangler D, Bhende S, Burkley D. In vitro antimicrobial evaluation of coated VICRYL* plus antibacterial suture (coated polyglactin 910 with triclosan) using zone of inhibition assays. Surg Infect. 2002;3:S79–87.CrossRef

23.

Takeno S, Yamashita K, Yamashita Y, Yamada K, Hoshino S, Yamauchi Y, Noritomi T. The results of a propensity score matching analysis of the efficacy of abdominal fascia and skin closure using PDS(®) plus antibacterial (Polydioxanone) sutures on the incidence of superficial incisional surgical site infections after Gastroenterologic surgery. Surg Infect. 2016;17(1):94–9.CrossRef

24.

Isik I, Selimen D, Senay S, Alhan C. Efficiency of antibacterial suture material in cardiac surgery: a double-blind randomized prospective study. Heart Surg Forum. 2012;15(1):E40–5.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Nakamura T, Kashimura N, Noji T, Suzuki O, Ambo Y, Nakamura F, Kishida A. Triclosan-coated sutures reduce the incidence of wound infections and the costs after colorectal surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Surgery. 2013;153(4):576–83.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Diener MK, Knebel P, Kieser M, Schüler P, Schiergens TS, Atanassov V, Neudecker J, Stein E, Thielemann H, Kunz R, et al. Effectiveness of triclosan-coated PDS plus versus uncoated PDS II sutures for prevention of surgical site infection after abdominal wall closure: the randomised controlled PROUD trial. Lancet. 2014;384(9938):142–52.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Daoud FC, Edmiston CE Jr, Leaper D. Meta-analysis of prevention of surgical site infections following incision closure with triclosan-coated sutures: robustness to new evidence. Surg Infect. 2014;15(3):165–81.CrossRef

28.

Wang ZX, Jiang CP, Cao Y, Ding YT. Systematic review and meta-analysis of triclosan-coated sutures for the prevention of surgical-site infection. Br J Surg. 2013;100(4):465–73.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Segers P, Speekenbrink RG, Ubbink DT, van Ogtrop ML, Bas A. Prevention of nosocomial infection in cardiac surgery by decontamination of the nasopharynx and oropharynx with chlorhexidine gluconate: a randomized controlled trial. Jama. 2006;296(20):2460–6.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Rupp ME, Lisco SJ, Lipsett PA, Perl TM, Keating K, Civetta JM, Mermel LA, Lee D, Dellinger EP, Donahoe M. Effect of a second-generation venous catheter impregnated with chlorhexidine and silver sulfadiazine on central catheter–related infections: a randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 2005;143(8):570–80.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Sanders D, Lambie J, Bond P, Moate R, Steer J. An in vitro study assessing the effect of mesh morphology and suture fixation on bacterial adherence. Hernia. 2013;17(6):779–89.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Timsit J-F, Mimoz O, Mourvillier B, Souweine B, Garrouste-Orgeas M, Alfandari S, Plantefeve G, Bronchard R, Troche G, Gauzit R. Randomized controlled trial of chlorhexidine dressing and highly adhesive dressing for preventing catheter-related infections in critically ill adults. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2012;186(12):1272–8.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Menderes G, Ali NA, Aagaard K, Sangi-Haghpeykar H. Chlorhexidine-alcohol compared with povidone-iodine for surgical-site antisepsis in cesarean deliveries. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120(5):1037–44.PubMed

34.

Suwanpimolkul G, Pongkumpai M, Suankratay C. A randomized trial of 2% chlorhexidine tincture compared with 10% aqueous povidone–iodine for venipuncture site disinfection: effects on blood culture contamination rates. J Infect. 2008;56(5):354–9.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Obermeier A, Schneider J, Wehner S, Matl FD, Schieker M, von Eisenhart-Rothe R, Stemberger A, Burgkart R. Novel high efficient coatings for anti-microbial surgical sutures using chlorhexidine in fatty acid slow-release carrier systems. PLoS One. 2014;9(7):e101426.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Comparison of intraoperative handling and wound healing between (NEOSORB® plus) and coated polyglactin 910 suture (NEOSORB®): a prospective, single-blind, randomized controlled trial
Authors: Bum Sik Tae
Ju Hyun Park
Jung Kwon Kim
Ja Hyeon Ku
Cheol Kwak
Hyeon Hoe Kim
Chang Wook Jeong
Publication date: 01-12-2018
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: BMC Surgery / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2482
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-018-0377-4

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Comparison of intraoperative handling and wound healing between (NEOSORB® plus) and coated polyglactin 910 suture (NEOSORB®): a prospective, single-blind, randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

The application of intraoperative ankle dislocation approach in the treatment of the unstable trimalleolar fractures involving posterior ankle comminuted fracture: a retrospective cohort study

Para-duodenal hernia: a report of five cases and review of literature

Prospective multicentre cohort study of patient-reported outcomes and complications following major abdominal neoplastic surgery (PATRONUS) – study protocol for a CHIR-Net student-initiated German medical audit study (CHIR-Net SIGMA study)

Close and regular surveillance is key to prevent severe complications for Peutz-Jeghers syndrome patients without gastrointestinal polyps: case report of a novel STK11 mutation (c.471_472delCT) in a Chinese girl

Oncological and functional results after surgical treatment of bone metastases at the proximal femur

Penetrating aortic injury left untreated for 20 days: a case report