The DOI matches its Crossref record.
In Vitro Antimicrobial Evaluation of Coated VICRYL* Plus Antibacterial Suture (Coated Polyglactin 910 with Triclosan) using Zone of Inhibition Assays
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In this study, coated polyglactin 910 suture with triclosan was evaluated for its ability to inhibit the growth of wild-type and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and S. epidermidis using several in vitro models. METHODS: In the standard experimental procedure, sterile sutures were inoculated with bacteria, plated in semisolid culture media, incubated for 24 h, and examined for zones of inhibition surrounding the sutures. Sutures were pretreated by several methods prior to inoculation, these included: 24-h aqueous immersion, serial 7-day aqueous immersion, knotting, and passage through subcutaneous and fascial tissue. Sutures were also compared to determine if suture diameter had an effect on the zone of inhibition. RESULTS: Coated polyglactin 910 suture with triclosan inhibited growth of test organisms consistently over a range of suture diameters and treatment conditions. The antibacterial effect was robust and did not diminish when sutures were placed in an aqueous environment for up to 7 days. Knotted suture with triclosan inhibited bacterial colonization after replicate inoculation. The bacteria-free zone surrounding each knotted suture had a volume of 14.5 cm(3) for S. epidermidis and 17.8 cm(3) for S. aureus. Coated polyglactin 910 suture with triclosan continued to produce zones of inhibition after five and 10 passes through fascia and subcutaneous tissue. CONCLUSION: These data support the conclusion that coated polyglactin 910 suture with triclosan provides antimicrobial effect sufficient to prevent in vitro colonization by S. aureus and S. epidermidis.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
A review of the biomaterials technologies for infection-resistant surfaces
Campoccia, D., Montanaro, L., & Arciola, C. R. (2013) · Biomaterials · doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.07.089 · Cited by 1,358
Allegranzi, B., Zayed, B., Bischoff, P., Kubilay, N. Z., de Jonge, S., de Vries, F., Gomes, S. M., Gans, S., Wallert, E. D., Wu, X., et al. (2016) · The Lancet Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1016/s1473-3099(16)30402-9 · Cited by 867
Liu, Y., Busscher, H. J., Zhao, B., Li, Y., Zhang, Z., van der Mei, H. C., Ren, Y., & Shi, L. (2016) · ACS Nano · doi:10.1021/acsnano.6b01370 · Cited by 379
Byrne, M., & Aly, A. (2019) · Aesthetic Surgery Journal · doi:10.1093/asj/sjz036 · Cited by 201
Kim, D., Wang, S., Keum, H., Ghaffari, R., Kim, Y., Tao, H., Panilaitis, B., Li, M., Kang, Z., Omenetto, F., et al. (2012) · Small · doi:10.1002/smll.201200933 · Cited by 170
Metadata
- Authors
- Rothenburger, S., Spangler, D., Bhende, S., & Burkley, D.
- Venue
- Surgical Infections
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2002-12
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- s1
- Pages
- s79-s87
- ISSN
- 1096-2964 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-8674
- OpenAlex
- W2066941250
- Cited by
- 180
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: In Vitro Antimicrobial Evaluation of Coated VICRYL* Plus Antibacterial Suture (Coated Polyglactin 910 with Triclosan) using Zone of Inhibition Assays. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1089/sur.2002.3.s1-79
- The paper
- Rothenburger, S., Spangler, D., Bhende, S., & Burkley, D. (2002). In Vitro Antimicrobial Evaluation of Coated VICRYL* Plus Antibacterial Suture (Coated Polyglactin 910 with Triclosan) using Zone of Inhibition Assays. Surgical Infections. https://doi.org/10.1089/sur.2002.3.s1-79
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.