The susceptibility of prosthetic biomaterials to infection.

BACKGROUND

Despite the use of a sterile technique and the administration of prophylactic antibiotics during surgical procedures, mesh infection continues to complicate the use of biomaterials. The purpose of this study was to compare the susceptibility to infection of prosthetic biomaterials in a live-animal model.

METHODS

The following seven prosthetic mesh biomaterials were used in this study. Expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) with silver/chlorhexidine (DM+), ePTFE (DM), porcine intestinal submucosa (S), polypropylene (M), ePTFE/polypropylene (X), hyaluronate/carboxymethylcellulose/polypropylene (SM), and human acellular dermal matrix (A). Lewis rats (n = 108) underwent creation of a single ventral hernia; 105 of them were repaired with a different mesh (2-cm2 piece). Twelve pieces of each mesh were inoculated at the time of hernia repair with 10(8) Staphylococcus aureus (n = 84). Three pieces of each mesh were placed without bacterial inoculation (n = 21). In three animals, no mesh was placed; instead, the peritoneum of the hernia defect was inoculated (n = 3). After 5 days, the animals were killed and the mesh was explanted (peritoneum for the nonmesh control). The mesh was vortex-washed and incubated in tryptic soy broth. Bacterial counts were determined using serial dilutions and spot plates and quantified in colony-forming units (CFU) per square centimeter of mesh present in the vortex wash fluid (wash count) and the soy broth (broth count). Data are presented as the mean log(10), with analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's test used to determine significance (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

The DM+ material had no detectable live bacteria in the wash or broth counts in 10 of 12 tested samples (p = 0.05). Of the samples that showed bacterial growth, the peritoneum control group had a lower wash count than A (p = 0.05) and the lowest broth count of all the materials except for DM+ (p = 0.05). In addition, SM had a significantly lower wash count than A (p = 0.05), with no broth count difference. In regard to wash and broth counts, DM, M, X, SM, S, and A were no different (p = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

The DM+ material was the least susceptible to infection. Impregnation with silver/chlorhexidine killed the inoculated bacteria, preventing their proliferation on the mesh surface. Other than DM+, native peritoneal tissue appears to be the least susceptible to infection. Silver/chlorhexidine appears to be an effective bactericidal agent for use with mesh biomaterials.