BACKGROUND: It has been estimated that 750,000 to 1 million surgical-site infections (SSIs) occur in the United States each year, causing substantial morbidity and mortality. Triclosan-coated sutures were developed as an adjunctive strategy for SSI risk reduction, but a recently published systematic literature review and meta-analysis suggested that no clinical benefit is associated with this technology. However, that study was hampered by poor selection of available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and low patient numbers. The current systematic review involves 13 randomized, international RCTs, totaling 3,568 surgical patients. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed on PubMed, Embase/Medline, Cochrane database group (Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Health Economic Evaluations Database/Database of Health Technology Assessments), and www.clinicaltrials.gov to identify RCTs of triclosan-coated sutures compared with conventional sutures and assessing the clinical effectiveness of antimicrobial sutures to decrease the risk for SSIs. A fixed- and random-effects model was developed, and pooled estimates reported as risk ratio (RR) with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Publication bias was assessed by analyzing a funnel plot of individual studies and testing the Egger regression intercept. RESULTS: The meta-analysis (13 RCTs, 3,568 patients) found that use of triclosan antimicrobial-coated sutures was associated with a decrease in SSIs in selected patient populations (fixed effect: RR = 0.734; 95% CI: 0.590-0.913; P = .005; random-effect: RR = 0.693; 95% CI: 0.533-0.920; P = .011). No publication bias was detected (Egger intercept test: P = .145). CONCLUSION: Decreasing the risk for SSIs requires a multifaceted "care bundle" approach, and this meta-analysis of current, pooled, peer-reviewed, randomized controlled trials suggests a clinical effectiveness of antimicrobial-coated sutures (triclosan) in the prevention of SSIs, representing Center for Evidence-Based Medicine level 1a evidence.
BACKGROUND: It has been estimated that 750,000 to 1 million surgical-site infections (SSIs) occur in the United States each year, causing substantial morbidity and mortality. Triclosan-coated sutures were developed as an adjunctive strategy for SSI risk reduction, but a recently published systematic literature review and meta-analysis suggested that no clinical benefit is associated with this technology. However, that study was hampered by poor selection of available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and low patient numbers. The current systematic review involves 13 randomized, international RCTs, totaling 3,568 surgical patients. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed on PubMed, Embase/Medline, Cochrane database group (Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Health Economic Evaluations Database/Database of Health Technology Assessments), and www.clinicaltrials.gov to identify RCTs of triclosan-coated sutures compared with conventional sutures and assessing the clinical effectiveness of antimicrobial sutures to decrease the risk for SSIs. A fixed- and random-effects model was developed, and pooled estimates reported as risk ratio (RR) with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Publication bias was assessed by analyzing a funnel plot of individual studies and testing the Egger regression intercept. RESULTS: The meta-analysis (13 RCTs, 3,568 patients) found that use of triclosan antimicrobial-coated sutures was associated with a decrease in SSIs in selected patient populations (fixed effect: RR = 0.734; 95% CI: 0.590-0.913; P = .005; random-effect: RR = 0.693; 95% CI: 0.533-0.920; P = .011). No publication bias was detected (Egger intercept test: P = .145). CONCLUSION: Decreasing the risk for SSIs requires a multifaceted "care bundle" approach, and this meta-analysis of current, pooled, peer-reviewed, randomized controlled trials suggests a clinical effectiveness of antimicrobial-coated sutures (triclosan) in the prevention of SSIs, representing Center for Evidence-Based Medicine level 1a evidence.
Authors: D Leaper; P Wilson; O Assadian; C Edmiston; M Kiernan; A Miller; G Bond-Smith; J Yap Journal: Ann R Coll Surg Engl Date: 2017-07 Impact factor: 1.891
Authors: N A Henriksen; E B Deerenberg; L Venclauskas; R H Fortelny; J M Garcia-Alamino; M Miserez; F E Muysoms Journal: Hernia Date: 2017-10-17 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: Andreas Obermeier; Jochen Schneider; Norbert Harrasser; Jutta Tübel; Heinrich Mühlhofer; Dominik Pförringer; Constantin von Deimling; Peter Foehr; Barbara Kiefel; Christina Krämer; Axel Stemberger; Matthias Schieker; Rainer Burgkart; Rüdiger von Eisenhart-Rothe Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-01-09 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: X Wu; N Z Kubilay; J Ren; B Allegranzi; P Bischoff; B Zayed; D Pittet; J Li Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Date: 2016-09-02 Impact factor: 3.267