Integrated Proteomics and Metabolomics Assessment Indicated Metabolic Alterations in Hypothalamus of Mice Exposed to Triclosan.

Triclosan (TCS) is a ubiquitous antimicrobial used in many daily consumer products. It has been reported to induce endocrine disrupting effects at low doses in mammals, disturbing sex hormone function and thyroid function. The hypothalamus plays a crucial role in the maintenance of neuroendocrine function and energy homeostasis. We speculated that the adverse effects of TCS might be related to the disturbance of metabolic processes in hypothalamus. The present study aimed at investigating the effects of TCS exposure on the protein and metabolite profiles in hypothalamus of mice. Male C57BL/6 mice were orally exposed to TCS at the dosage of 10 mg/kg/d for 13 weeks. The hypothalamus was isolated and processed for mass spectrometry (MS)-based proteomics and metabolomics analyses. The results showed that a 10.6% decrease (P = 0.066) in body weight gain was observed in the TCS exposure group compared with vehicle control group. Differential analysis defined 52 proteins and 57 metabolites that delineated TCS exposed mice from vehicle controls. Among the differential features, multiple proteins and metabolites were found to play vital roles in neuronal signaling and function. Bioinformatics analysis revealed that these differentially expressed proteins and metabolites were involved in four major biological processes, including glucose metabolism, purine metabolism, neurotransmitter release, and neural plasticity, suggesting the disturbance of homeostasis in energy metabolism, mitochondria function, neurotransmitter system, and neuronal function. Our results may provide insights into the neurotoxicity of TCS and extend our understanding of the biological effects induced by TCS exposure.

[Triclosan-coated sutures in colorectal surgery : Assessment and meta-analysis of the recommendations of the WHO guideline]. / Triclosan-beschichtete Nahtmaterialien in der kolorektalen Chirurgie : Bewertung und Metaanalyse zu den Empfehlungen der WHO-Richtlinie.

BACKGROUND: In the global guidelines for the prevention of surgical site infections (SSI), the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends the general use of triclosan-coated sutures irrespective of the type of surgical intervention. OBJECTIVE: Can this recommendation on the use of triclosan-coated sutures be confirmed by a meta-analysis specifically for colorectal surgery? METHODS: Randomized and non-randomized clinical trials comparing triclosan-coated and uncoated sutures for the efficacy in reducing the SSI rate in colorectal surgery were identified by a systematic literature review. In addition, various quality criteria were set for the studies to be included: SSI definition according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a priori sample size calculation and a maximum SSI rate of 20%. The odds ratios were pooled using a fixed and random effects model, the 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated and subgroup analyses were carried out. RESULTS: Included in the meta-analysis were 3 prospective randomized trials (RCT) and 3 non-randomized trials involving a total of 2957 subjects. The average SSI rate was 6.90% (76/1101) in the triclosan group and 9.11% (169/1856) in the control group, resulting in an odds ratio of 0.62 (95% CI: 0.29-1.31). Subgroup analysis showed a decreased risk for SSI in monocentric trials (OR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.25-0.60) but an increased SSI risk in multicenter trials (OR = 1.75, 95% CI: 1.11-2.77). CONCLUSION: Against the background of a moderate to high risk of bias and the partially contradictory findings of the studies, the general recommendation of the WHO on the use of triclosan-coated sutures for colorectal surgery could not be confirmed.

Meta-analysis of the potential economic impact following introduction of absorbable antimicrobial sutures.

BACKGROUND: Despite several randomized trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses that have demonstrated the effectiveness of antimicrobial (triclosan-coated or -impregnated) sutures (TCS), the clinical and economic impact of using these sutures compared with conventional non-antimicrobial-coated absorbable sutures (NCS) remains poorly documented. METHODS: An independent systematic review and meta-analysis of all published evidence from January 2005 to September 2016 comparing TCS with NCS was conducted. Surgical-site infection (SSI) was the primary outcome. The results of the meta-analysis were used in a decision-tree deterministic and stochastic cost model, using the National Health Service (NHS England)-based cost of inpatient admissions for infections and differential costs of TCS versus NCS. RESULTS: Thirty-four studies were included in the final assessment from an initial 163 identified citations; 20 of 34 studies were randomized, and 17 of 34 reported blinding of physicians and assessors. Using a random-effects model, the odds ratio for SSI in the TCS compared with NCS control groups was statistically significant (odds ratio 0·61, 95 per cent c.i. 0·52 to 0·73; P < 0·001). There was significant heterogeneity (I2 = 49 per cent). Using random-effects event estimates of SSI for TCS and NCS for each individual wound type, the mean savings per surgical procedure from using antimicrobial sutures were significant: £91·25 (90 per cent c.i. 49·62 to 142·76) (€105·09 (57·15 to 164·41); exchange rate 15 November 2016) across all wound types. CONCLUSION: The reviewed literature suggested that antimicrobial sutures may result in significant savings across various surgical wound types.

Efficacy of triclosan-coated sutures for reducing risk of surgical site infection in adults: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection (SSI) is the third most frequent type of nosocomial infections. Triclosan-coated sutures are often used to reduce the risk of SSI, but studies examining this have given conflicting results. Therefore, this meta-analysis was performed to assess the efficacy of triclosan-coated sutures for reducing risk of SSI in adults. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched to identify randomized clinical trials evaluating triclosan-coated sutures for preventing SSI on patients 18 y or older. RESULTS: Thirteen randomized clinical trials involving 5256 participants were included. Triclosan-coated sutures were associated with lower risk of SSI than uncoated sutures across all surgeries (risk ratio [RR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65-0.88, P < 0.001). Similar proportions of patients experienced wound dehiscence with either type of suture (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.49-1.89, P = 0.92). Subgroup analysis showed lower risk of SSI with triclosan-coated sutures in abdominal surgeries (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.50-0.99, P = 0.04) and group with prophylactic antibiotic (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.63-0.99, P = 0.04). However, such risk reduction was not observed in cardiac surgeries, breast surgeries, or group without prophylactic antibiotic. CONCLUSIONS: Triclosan-coated sutures can decrease the incidence of SSI in abdominal surgeries and might not interfere with wound healing process. Nevertheless, further studies are needed to examine whether triclosan-coated sutures are effective at preventing SSI in non-abdominal surgeries and to further study the interaction of antibiotic prophylaxis with triclosan-coated sutures.

The effect of triclosan coated sutures on rate of surgical site infection after hip and knee replacement: a protocol for a double-blind randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: 187,000 hip and knee joint replacements are performed every year in the National Health Service (NHS). One of the commonest complications is surgical site infection (SSI), and this represents a significant burden in terms of patient morbidity, mortality and cost to health services around the world. The aim of this randomised controlled trial (RCT) is to determine if the addition of triclosan coated sutures to a standard regimen can reduce the rate of SSI after total knee replacement (TKR) and total hip replacement (THR). METHODS: 2400 patients due to undergo a total hip or knee replacement are being recruited into this two-centre RCT. Participants are recruited before surgery and randomised to either standard care or intervention group. Participants, outcome assessors and statistician are blind to treatment allocation throughout the study. The intervention consists of triclosan coated sutures vs. standard non-coated sutures. The primary outcome is the Health protection Agency (HPA) defined superficial surgical site infection at 30 days. Secondary outcomes include HPA defined deep surgical site infection at 12 months, length of hospital stay, critical care stay, and payer costs. DISCUSSION: To date there are no orthopaedic randomised controlled trials on this scale assessing the effectiveness of a surgical intervention, particularly those that can be translated across the surgical specialities. The results from this trial will inform evidence-based recommendations for suture selection in the management of patients undergoing total hip or knee replacement. If triclosan coated sutures are found to be an effective intervention, implementation into clinical practice could improve long-term outcomes for patients undergoing hip and knee replacement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN 17807356.

An economic model: value of antimicrobial-coated sutures to society, hospitals, and third-party payers in preventing abdominal surgical site infections.

BACKGROUND: While the persistence of high surgical site infection (SSI) rates has prompted the advent of more expensive sutures that are coated with antimicrobial agents to prevent SSIs, the economic value of such sutures has yet to be determined. METHODS: Using TreeAge Pro, we developed a decision analytic model to determine the cost-effectiveness of using antimicrobial sutures in abdominal incisions from the hospital, third-party payer, and societal perspectives. Sensitivity analyses systematically varied the risk of developing an SSI (range, 5%-20%), the cost of triclosan-coated sutures (range, $5-$25/inch), and triclosan-coated suture efficacy in preventing infection (range, 5%-50%) to highlight the range of costs associated with using such sutures. RESULTS: Triclosan-coated sutures saved $4,109-$13,975 (hospital perspective), $4,133-$14,297 (third-party payer perspective), and $40,127-$53,244 (societal perspective) per SSI prevented, when a surgery had a 15% SSI risk, depending on their efficacy. If the SSI risk was no more than 5% and the efficacy in preventing SSIs was no more than 10%, triclosan-coated sutures resulted in extra expenditure for hospitals and third-party payers (resulting in extra costs of $1,626 and $1,071 per SSI prevented for hospitals and third-party payers, respectively; SSI risk, 5%; efficacy, 10%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that switching to triclosan-coated sutures from the uncoated sutures can both prevent SSIs and save substantial costs for hospitals, third-party payers, and society, as long as efficacy in preventing SSIs is at least 10% and SSI risk is at least 10%.

Is there an evidence-based argument for embracing an antimicrobial (triclosan)-coated suture technology to reduce the risk for surgical-site infections?: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: It has been estimated that 750,000 to 1 million surgical-site infections (SSIs) occur in the United States each year, causing substantial morbidity and mortality. Triclosan-coated sutures were developed as an adjunctive strategy for SSI risk reduction, but a recently published systematic literature review and meta-analysis suggested that no clinical benefit is associated with this technology. However, that study was hampered by poor selection of available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and low patient numbers. The current systematic review involves 13 randomized, international RCTs, totaling 3,568 surgical patients. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed on PubMed, Embase/Medline, Cochrane database group (Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Health Economic Evaluations Database/Database of Health Technology Assessments), and www.clinicaltrials.gov to identify RCTs of triclosan-coated sutures compared with conventional sutures and assessing the clinical effectiveness of antimicrobial sutures to decrease the risk for SSIs. A fixed- and random-effects model was developed, and pooled estimates reported as risk ratio (RR) with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Publication bias was assessed by analyzing a funnel plot of individual studies and testing the Egger regression intercept. RESULTS: The meta-analysis (13 RCTs, 3,568 patients) found that use of triclosan antimicrobial-coated sutures was associated with a decrease in SSIs in selected patient populations (fixed effect: RR = 0.734; 95% CI: 0.590-0.913; P = .005; random-effect: RR = 0.693; 95% CI: 0.533-0.920; P = .011). No publication bias was detected (Egger intercept test: P = .145). CONCLUSION: Decreasing the risk for SSIs requires a multifaceted "care bundle" approach, and this meta-analysis of current, pooled, peer-reviewed, randomized controlled trials suggests a clinical effectiveness of antimicrobial-coated sutures (triclosan) in the prevention of SSIs, representing Center for Evidence-Based Medicine level 1a evidence.

Triclosan-coated sutures reduce the incidence of wound infections and the costs after colorectal surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In colorectal surgeries, surgical site infections (SSIs) frequently cause morbidity; an incidence of up to 20% has been shown in previous studies. Recently, to prevent microbial colonization of suture material in operative wounds, triclosan-coated polyglactin suture materials with antimicrobial activity have been developed; however, their significance in colorectal surgery remains unclear. This randomized controlled trial was conducted to assess the value of triclosan-coated polyglactin sutures in colorectal surgery. METHODS: A total of 410 consecutive patients who had undergone elective colorectal operations were enrolled in this trial. Of those patients, the 206 in the study group underwent wound closure with triclosan-coated polyglactin 910 antimicrobial sutures, and the 204 patients in the control group received conventional wound closures with polyglactin 910 sutures. RESULTS: The study group and the control group were comparable regarding risk factors for SSIs. The incidence of wound infection in the study group was 9 of 206 patients (4.3%), and that in the control group was 19 of 204 patients (9.3%). The difference is statistically significant in the 2 groups (P = .047). The median additional cost of wound infection management was $2,310. The actual entire additional cost, therefore, of 9 patients in the study group was $18,370, and that of 19 patients in the control group was $60,814. CONCLUSION: Triclosan-coated sutures can reduce the incidence of wound infections and the costs in colorectal surgery.

Triclosan-coated sutures for the reduction of sternal wound infections: economic considerations.

BACKGROUND: Sternal wound infections are a major complication after cardiac surgery in terms of morbidity and cost increase. To decrease the incidence of infection, we evaluated triclosan-coated sutures for the closure of the sternal incision, as it is known that most of the surgical site infections are related to the incision site. METHODS: From May to December 2005, a total of 479 patients underwent a cardiac surgical procedure. From those, 103 patients were closed with triclosan-coated suture material (cost per patient $30 [in United States dollars]), whereas the remaining 376 patients had their incision closed with noncoated sutures (cost per patient $21). RESULTS: During the study period, 24 patients had superficial (n = 10) or deep (n = 14) sternal wound infections (cost per patient $11,200). All those patients were closed with conventional suture material. In the triclosan group, no wound infection or dehiscence was observed during hospital stay and follow-up visits. CONCLUSIONS: Triclosan-coated sutures might be valuable in the reduction of sternal wound infections and avoid the suture being a risk factor for surgical site infections. The increased cost of the coated suture material has to be weighed against the enormous cost of sternal wound infections caused directly by the cost of care as well as indirectly through the loss of economic productivity.