Abstract / Summary
Objective: This study sought to assess and compare the extent of bacterial colonization on various monofilament suture types, including polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), polyglycolide-co-caprolactone (PGCL Monocryl), triclosan-coated polydioxanone (Monocryl Plus), and polyamide (nylon). The investigation also aimed to identify predominant bacterial species colonizing these materials and evaluate their potential impact on wound healing and infection control.
Methods: An in vitro experimental design combined with clinical sampling was employed. Sutures were retrieved from patients following periodontal surgery between days 7 and 10. Microbiological culture methods, colony-forming unit (CFU) quantification, bacterial identification through Vitek2, and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) were utilized to analyze both aerobic and anaerobic bacterial growth. Statistical analysis was performed to compare bacterial adhesion among the different suture types.
Results: The results revealed that PTFE sutures exhibited the lowest bacterial colonization, recording mean aerobic and anaerobic counts of 9.8 × 108 CFU/mL and 8.49 × 108 CFU/mL, respectively, likely due to their smooth and hydrophobic surface characteristics. In contrast, PGCL Monocryl demonstrated the highest levels of colonization, with aerobic and anaerobic counts of 13.3 × 108 and 13.68 × 108 CFU/mL, and harbored bacteria such as Lactococcus garvieae, Staphylococcus warneri, and Streptococcus sobrinus. Monocryl Plus and nylon showed moderate colonization levels, with the triclosan coating on Monocryl Plus reducing but not preventing bacterial attachment.
Conclusion: PTFE demonstrated the lowest numerical bacterial colonization among the evaluated suture materials. However, the differences between the groups were not statistically significant and should therefore be interpreted with caution. Further studies with larger sample sizes are needed to confirm these findings.
Clinical relevance: The study provides preliminary evidence on bacterial colonization of different monofilament suture materials. These findings may assist clinicians in selecting suture materials, but larger clinical studies are required before definitive recommendations can be made.