Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

The effects of different suture materials in the nasal cavity

  • A Durmaz (a1), A Kilic (a2), R Gumral (a2), U Yildizoglu (a1) and B Polat (a1)...

Abstract

Objective:

To investigate the effects of different suture materials in the nasal cavity on encrustation and micro-organism colonisation.

Methods:

Four different suture materials were used to suture the nasal septum. The effects of suture materials on intranasal encrustation were evaluated with anterior rhinoscopy. The sutures were removed and evaluated in terms of micro-organism colonisation on the 7th and 21st post-operative days.

Results:

Monofilament sutures were found to cause less encrustation and micro-organism colonisation. There was increased late-stage encrustation if an absorbable monofilament suture remained in place for a long time. The removal of a non-absorbable monofilament suture in the early or late post-operative period made no difference in terms of micro-organism growth on the suture.

Conclusion:

The material and physical characteristics of sutures placed inside the nose may indirectly affect the healing process. It may be more appropriate to use different materials depending on the length of time the suture is to remain in place.

Copyright

Corresponding author

Address for correspondence: Dr Abdullah Durmaz, Department of Otolaryngology, Gülhane Military Medical Academy, Etlik, Ankara 06010, Turkey Fax: +90 312 304 57 00 E-mail: adurmaz@gata.edu.tr

References

Hide All
1Dobratz, EJ, Park, SS. Septoplasty pearls. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2009;42:527–37
2Certal, V, Silva, H, Santos, T, Correia, A, Carvalho, C. Trans-septal suturing technique in septoplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Rhinology 2012;50:236–45
3Bhalla, RK, Kaushik, V, de Carpentier, J. Conchopexy suture to prevent middle turbinate lateralisation and septal haematoma after endoscopic sinus surgery. Rhinology 2005;43:143–5
4Hari, C, Marnane, C, Wormald, PJ. Quilting sutures for nasal septum. J Laryngol Otol 2008;122:522–3
5Hockstein, NG, Bales, CB, Palmer, JN. Transseptal suture to secure middle meatal spacers. Ear Nose Throat J 2006;85:47–8
6Hussey, M, Bagg, M. Principles of wound closure. Oper Tech Sports Med 2011;19:206–11
7Gabrielli, F, Potenza, C, Puddu, P, Sera, F, Masini, C, Abeni, D. Suture materials and other factors associated with tissue reactivity, infection, and wound dehiscence among plastic surgery outpatients. Plast Reconstr Surg 2001;107:3845
8Banche, G, Roana, J, Mandras, N, Amasio, M, Gallesio, C, Allizond, V et al. Microbial adherence on various intraoral suture materials in patients undergoing dental surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007;65:1503–7
9Edmiston, CE Jr, Krepel, CJ, Marks, RM, Rossi, PJ, Sanger, J, Goldblatt, M et al. Microbiology of explanted suture segments from infected and noninfected surgical patients. J Clin Microbiol 2013;51:417–21
10Research Randomizer. In: http://www.randomizer.org [17 January 2016]
11Reiter, D. Methods and materials for wound closure. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1995;28:1069–80
12Grigg, TR, Liewehr, FR, Patton, WR, Buxton, TB, McPherson, JC. Effect of the wicking behaviour of multifilament sutures. J Endod 2004;30:649–52
13Otten, JE, Wiedmann-Al-Ahmad, M, Jahnke, H, Pelz, K. Bacterial colonization on different suture materials. A potential risk for intraoral dentoalveolar surgery. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2005;74:627–35
14Masini, BD, Stinner, DJ, Waterman, SM, Wenke, JC. Bacterial adherence to suture materials. J Surg Educ 2011;68:101–4

Keywords

The effects of different suture materials in the nasal cavity

  • A Durmaz (a1), A Kilic (a2), R Gumral (a2), U Yildizoglu (a1) and B Polat (a1)...

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed