Randomised controlled trial of triclosan coated vs uncoated sutures in primary hip and knee arthroplasty.

Abstract

BACKGROUNDTriclosan-coated vicryl plus suture (Ethicon, Inc.) was developed to reduce microbial colonisation during surgical procedures. However, its effect on wound healing and surgical site infections remain unclear after hip and knee arthro-plasty surgery.AIMTo determine the effect of triclosan-coated sutures (TCS) vs non-coated sutures on wound healing, following primary hip and knee arthroplasties.METHODSA single-centred, double-blind randomised controlled trial (RCT) was undertaken. We randomly allocated patients to receive either the triclosan-coated sutures (TCS vicryl plus) or non-coated sutures (NCS vicryl) during the closure of unilateral primary hip and knee arthroplasties. We utilised the ASEPSIS wound scoring system to evaluate wound healing for the first 6 weeks post-operatively.RESULTSOne hundred and fifty patients undergoing primary total hip or knee arthroplasty over a one-year period were included. Eighty-one were randomised to the TCS group and 69 to the NCS group. Despite no statistically significant difference in the ASEPSIS scores among the study groups (P = 0.75), sensitivity analysis using the Mann Whitney test (P = 0.036) as well as assessment of the wound complications at 6 weeks follow up, demonstrated significantly higher wound complication rates in the TCS group (8 vs 1, P = 0.03).CONCLUSIONNo clear advantage was demonstrated for using the TCS. However, larger multi-centred RCTs are required to validate their use in hip and knee arthroplasty surgery.