Comparison of the Number of Bacterial Colonies Among Four Types of Suture Threads Using Simple Loop Method Following Periodontal Surgery in Patients With Periodontitis: A Single-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial Publisher



Naghsh N¹ ; Yaghini J¹ ; Arab A² ; Soltani S³ Show Affiliations
Source: Dental Research Journal Published:2023

Abstract

Background: This study investigated the number of bacterial colonies in four types of suture threads, including silk, nylon, monocryl, and monocryl plus after periodontal surgery in patients with moderate-to-severe periodontitis. Materials and Methods: In this single-blind randomized clinical trial, a total of 12 patients with periodontitis who required periodontal flap surgery in all quadrants were included. One type of suture, either silk, nylon, monocryl, or monocryl plus (coated with triclosan), was used following each surgery in each quadrant. Sutures (3 mm) were removed from the mid, posterior, and anterior regions of the flap 7 days postoperatively, and placed in a tube-containing buffer medium to transfer to the culture medium in a laboratory. Then, the bacterial colonies on each culture medium were counted manually. Finally, the mean number of grown colonies (anaerobic and aerobic) was computed and compared in each group of sutures. Data were analyzed by SPSS (Version 20) using the repeated measures ANOVA and least significant difference follow-up tests (α = 0.05). Results: The findings of this study indicated a significantly higher mean number of aerobic, anaerobic, and aerobic-anaerobic colonies in silk suture than in the other three types of sutures (P < 0.05). However, no significant difference was observed among other types of sutures (P > 0.05). Conclusion: The results of this study showed that silk suture had a higher bacterial adhesion (aerobic, anaerobic, and aerobic-anaerobic) than monofilament sutures, including nylon, monocryl, and monocryl plus. Moreover, no significant difference was found among the monofilament sutures in the number of colonies grown on them. © 2023 Journal of Research in Medical Sciences | Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow.