Harrell A G, Novitsky Y W, Kercher K W, Foster M, Burns J M, Kuwada T S, Heniford B T
Carolinas Laparoscopic and Advanced Surgery Program, Department of General Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC 28203, USA.
Hernia. 2006 Apr;10(2):120-4. doi: 10.1007/s10029-005-0056-0. Epub 2006 Feb 2.
Although mesh use is important for effective herniorrhaphy in adults, prosthetic infections can cause serious morbidity. Bacterial adherence to the mesh is a known precursor to prosthetic infection. We compared the ability of common mesh prosthetics to resist bacterial adherence. The meshes studied included polypropylene (Marlex, expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) with and without silver chlorhexidine coating (DualMesh Plus and Dualmesh) composite meshes (Composix E/X, Proceed, and Parietex Composite) and lightweight polypropylene meshes (TiMesh, Ultrapro, and Vypro). Fifteen samples of each mesh type were individually inoculated with a suspension of 10(8 )methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in tryptic soy broth. After incubation at 37 degrees C for 1 h, the mesh pieces were then removed and serially washed. The colony-forming units (CFU) of MRSA present in the initial inoculum, at the end of the 1-h warm-water bath (broth count), and the pooled washes (wash count), were determined using serial dilutions and spot plating. The bacteria not accounted for in the broth or wash counts were considered adhered to the mesh. Samples of each mesh type were also analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Data are presented as the mean percentage adherence with ANOVA and Tukey's test used to determine significance (P<0.05). The DualMesh Plus mesh had no detectable MRSA in the broth or the pooled wash samples. Dualmesh had less adherence compared with Marlex, Proceed, and Vypro (P<0.05). Conversely, Vypro had a statistically higher adherence (96%, P<0.05) as compared to TiMesh, Ultrapro, Composix E/X, and Parietex Composite. SEM confirmed bacterial adherence to all the mesh types except DualMesh Plus. The ability of a biomaterial to resist infection has an important clinical significance. DualMesh Plus, due to its antimicrobial coating, is the only mesh type of the nine tested that demonstrated a bactericidal property. Standard PTFE (Dualmesh) also had less bacterial adherence. Vypro demonstrated an increase in bacterial adherence; this was possibly due to the multifilament polyglactin 910 weaved within the prolene component of the mesh.
尽管在成人有效的疝修补术中使用补片很重要,但人工补片感染会导致严重的发病情况。细菌附着于补片是人工补片感染已知的先兆。我们比较了常见补片假体抵抗细菌附着的能力。所研究的补片包括聚丙烯(Marlex)、有和没有氯己定银涂层的膨体聚四氟乙烯(PTFE)(DualMesh Plus和Dualmesh)、复合补片(Composix E/X、Proceed和Parietex Composite)以及轻质聚丙烯补片(TiMesh、Ultrapro和Vypro)。每种补片类型的15个样本分别接种于含有10⁸耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MRSA)的胰蛋白酶大豆肉汤悬液中。在37℃孵育1小时后,取出补片并依次冲洗。使用连续稀释和平板接种法测定初始接种物中、1小时温水浴结束时(肉汤计数)以及合并冲洗液中(冲洗计数)存在的MRSA的菌落形成单位(CFU)。肉汤或冲洗计数中未计数的细菌被认为附着于补片。每种补片类型的样本也使用扫描电子显微镜(SEM)进行分析。数据以平均附着百分比表示,采用方差分析和Tukey检验确定显著性(P<0.05)。DualMesh Plus补片在肉汤或合并冲洗样本中未检测到MRSA。与Marlex、Proceed和Vypro相比,Dualmesh的附着较少(P<0.05)。相反,与TiMesh、Ultrapro、Composix E/X和Parietex Composite相比,Vypro的附着在统计学上更高(96%,P<0.05)。SEM证实除DualMesh Plus外,所有补片类型均有细菌附着。生物材料抵抗感染的能力具有重要的临床意义。由于其抗菌涂层,DualMesh Plus是所测试的九种补片中唯一表现出杀菌特性的补片类型。标准PTFE(Dualmesh)的细菌附着也较少。Vypro显示出细菌附着增加;这可能是由于编织在补片的普理灵成分中的多聚乳酸910复丝所致。