Ahmed H. Al-Ani, Priyadharshini Sekar, Zaid G. Hamdoon, Waad kheder, Natheer H. Al-Rawi
{"title":"Influence of Suture Type on Implant Wound Healing and Bacterial Adherence","authors":"Ahmed H. Al-Ani, Priyadharshini Sekar, Zaid G. Hamdoon, Waad kheder, Natheer H. Al-Rawi","doi":"10.1002/jbm.b.35679","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Suture selection influences wound healing, patient comfort, and infection risk in implant surgery. Although monofilament sutures are commonly recommended for implant surgery, the comparative clinical performance of different types of monofilament sutures remains underexplored. This study compared the clinical and microbiological performance of polyamide and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) sutures. A split-mouth design was used in 19 patients (38 implant sites) to compare wound healing, patient comfort, and bacterial adherence associated with polyamide and PTFE sutures. Wound healing was assessed using the early wound healing score (EHS, 0–10 scale), patient comfort via a visual analog scale (VAS, 1–10), and bacterial colonization using real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) analysis of seven oral pathogens. Knot retention was recorded on days 0 and 7. Mean early wound healing scores were similar between PTFE (6.47 ± 0.52) and polyamide (6.63 ± 0.63) (<i>p</i> > 0.05). No significant differences were found between the two groups regarding surrounding tissue irritation (<i>p</i> > 0.05). However, knot stability decreased significantly for both materials, with polyamide showing higher knot loss (44.4% vs. 22.2%, <i>p</i> = 0.008). A significant number of <i>Porphyromonas gingivalis</i> were detected in PTFE compared to polyamide, which demonstrated enhanced reepithelialization and minimal tissue reaction. Both suture types achieved satisfactory healing and patient comfort, but their distinct microbial adhesion patterns may influence long-term peri-implant outcomes. Polyamide demonstrated lower <i>P. gingivalis</i> colonization and better re-epithelialization, suggesting potential clinical advantages.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15269,"journal":{"name":"Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials","volume":"113 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of biomedical materials research. Part B, Applied biomaterials","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jbm.b.35679","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Suture selection influences wound healing, patient comfort, and infection risk in implant surgery. Although monofilament sutures are commonly recommended for implant surgery, the comparative clinical performance of different types of monofilament sutures remains underexplored. This study compared the clinical and microbiological performance of polyamide and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) sutures. A split-mouth design was used in 19 patients (38 implant sites) to compare wound healing, patient comfort, and bacterial adherence associated with polyamide and PTFE sutures. Wound healing was assessed using the early wound healing score (EHS, 0–10 scale), patient comfort via a visual analog scale (VAS, 1–10), and bacterial colonization using real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) analysis of seven oral pathogens. Knot retention was recorded on days 0 and 7. Mean early wound healing scores were similar between PTFE (6.47 ± 0.52) and polyamide (6.63 ± 0.63) (p > 0.05). No significant differences were found between the two groups regarding surrounding tissue irritation (p > 0.05). However, knot stability decreased significantly for both materials, with polyamide showing higher knot loss (44.4% vs. 22.2%, p = 0.008). A significant number of Porphyromonas gingivalis were detected in PTFE compared to polyamide, which demonstrated enhanced reepithelialization and minimal tissue reaction. Both suture types achieved satisfactory healing and patient comfort, but their distinct microbial adhesion patterns may influence long-term peri-implant outcomes. Polyamide demonstrated lower P. gingivalis colonization and better re-epithelialization, suggesting potential clinical advantages.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Biomedical Materials Research – Part B: Applied Biomaterials is a highly interdisciplinary peer-reviewed journal serving the needs of biomaterials professionals who design, develop, produce and apply biomaterials and medical devices. It has the common focus of biomaterials applied to the human body and covers all disciplines where medical devices are used. Papers are published on biomaterials related to medical device development and manufacture, degradation in the body, nano- and biomimetic- biomaterials interactions, mechanics of biomaterials, implant retrieval and analysis, tissue-biomaterial surface interactions, wound healing, infection, drug delivery, standards and regulation of devices, animal and pre-clinical studies of biomaterials and medical devices, and tissue-biopolymer-material combination products. Manuscripts are published in one of six formats:
• original research reports
• short research and development reports
• scientific reviews
• current concepts articles
• special reports
• editorials
Journal of Biomedical Materials Research – Part B: Applied Biomaterials is an official journal of the Society for Biomaterials, Japanese Society for Biomaterials, the Australasian Society for Biomaterials, and the Korean Society for Biomaterials. Manuscripts from all countries are invited but must be in English. Authors are not required to be members of the affiliated Societies, but members of these societies are encouraged to submit their work to the journal for consideration.