MAKSİLLOFASİYAL CERRAHİDE KULLANILAN DİKİŞ MATERYALLERİ: DERLEME

Abstract

Maksillofasiyal cerrahide dikiş materyalleri; operasyonun son fazında yara kenarlarını yaklaştırarak stabilize etmek, kanama kontrolü sağlamak ve iyileşmeyi arttırmak için kullanılmaktadır. Tarih boyunca,  absorbe edilebilen ve edilemeyen bir çok dikiş materyali kullanılmıştır. Katgüt, poliglikolik asit, poliglaktin, polidioksanon, poliglikonat, poliglekapron- 25 absorbe olabilen süturlar arasında bulunmaktadır. İpek, naylon, keten, pamuk, polyester, paslanmaz çelik, polibutester, polietilen ve polipropilen ise absorbe olamayan süturlar arasında yer almaktadır. Bu literatür derlemesinde, ağız ve çene cerrahisinde sıklıkla kullanılan dikiş materyallerinin karakteristik özelliklerini gözden geçirmek amaçlandı.

  Sonuç olarak, dikiş materyalinin operasyon türüne, materyalin doku reaksiyonuna, bakteri invazyonuna, fiziksel ve biyouyumluluk karakterine göre seçilmesinin gerekliliği gözlemlendi.

Keywords

• Çene cerrahisi
• dikiş materyalleri
• yara iyileşmesi

SUTURE MATERIALS IN MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY: A LITERATURE REVIEW

Abstract

In maxillofacial surgery, suture materials are being used toapproximate and stabilize wound lips, to promote haemostasis and to improve healing at the last phase of the operation. Throughout the history, many kinds of absorbable and non-absorbable suture materials are used. Absorbable sutures include catgut, polyglycolic acid, polyglactin, polydioxanone, polyglyconate and poliglecaprone 25. Non-absorbable sutures include silk, nylon, linen, cotton, polyester, stainless steel, polybutester, polyethylene and polypropylene. The purpose of this literature review was to identify the characteristic features of suture materials which are generally used in oral and maxillofacial surgery. In conclusion, it was observed that the suture material should be selected based on operation type, tissue reaction, bacterial invasion and the physical and biocompatibility characters of the material

Keywords

• Oral surgery
• suture materials
• wound healing

References

1. Moy RL, Waldman B, Hein DW. A review of sutures and suturing techniques. J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1992; 18:785-95.
2. Yıldırım G, Kaya Ö, Güngörmüş M, Nalbantoğlu NG, Gürbüz G. Oral Mukoza Kesilerinde Sütur ve Butil- 2-Siyanoakrilatın klinik ve histopatolojik olarak karşılaştırılması. Atatürk Üniv Diş Hek Fak Derg. 1999; 9: 1-8.
3. Minozzi F, Bollero P, Unfer V, Dolci A, Galli M. The sutures in dentistry. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2009; 3:217-26.
4. Fomete B, Saheeb B D, Obiadazie A C. A prospective clinical evaluation of the longevity of resorbable sutures in oral surgical procedures. Nigerian Journal of Clinical Practice. 2013; 16:334- 8.
5. Macht SD, Krizek JJ. Suture and suturing-current concepts.J Oral Surg 1978; 36:710-2.
6. Kundu B, Schlimp CJ, Nürnberger S, Redl H, Kundu C. Thromboelastometric and platelet responses to silk biomaterials. Sci Rep. 2014; 13:49-5.
7. Muffly TM, Tizzano AP, Walters MD. The history and evolution of sutures in pelvic surgery. J R Soc Med. 2011; 104:107-12.
8. Greenberg JA. The Use of Barbed Sutures in Obstetrics and Gynecology. Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 3:82-91.

9. Frazza EJ, Schmitt EE. A new absorbable suture. J Biomed Mater Res. 1971; 5:43-58.
10. Brandt MT, Jenkins WS. Suturing principles for the dentoalveolar surgeon. Dent Clin North Am. 2012; 56:281-303.
11. Ferguson JR, Schular K, Thornton BP, Vasconez HC.The effect of saliva and oral intake on the tensile properties of sutures. An experimental study. Ann Plastic Surg 2007; 58:268-72.
12. Otten JE, Wiedmann-Al-Ahmad M, JahnkeH, 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.
13. Shaw RJ, Negus TW, Mellor TK. A prospective clinical evaluation of the longevity of resorbable sutures in oral mucosa. Br J oral Maxillofac Surg 1996; 34:252-4.
14. Silverstein L H, Kurtzman G M, Shatz P C. Suturing for Optimal Soft-Tissue Management. Journal of Oral Implantology 2009; 35:82-90.
15. Silverstein L H, Kurtzman G M. A review of dental suturing for optimal soft-tissue management, compendium of continuing education in dentistry. ISRN Dentistry 2005; 26:163–209.
16. Muglali M, Yılmaz N, Inal S, Guvenc T. Immunohistochemical Comprasion of Indermil With Traditional Suture Materials in Dental Surgery. The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery. 2011; 22:1875-9.
17. Javed F, Al-Askar M, Almas K, Romanos G E, Al Hezaimi K. Tissue Reactions to Various Suture Materials Used in Oral Surgical Interventions: Review Article. ISRN Dentistry 2012; 2012:762095.
18. Okamoto T, Rosini K, Miyahara G I, Gabrielli M F R. Healing Process of the Gingival Mucosa and Dental Alveolus Following Tooth Extraction and Suture with Polyglycolic Acid and Polyglactin 910 Threads. Comparative Histomorphologic Study in Rats. Braz Dent J 2004; 5:35-43.
19. Banche G, Roana J, Mandras N, Amasio M, GallesioC, Allizond V, AngrettiA, Tullio V, Cuffini AM. Microbial adherence on various intraoral suture materials in patients undergoing dental surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007; 65:1503-7.
20. Selvig KA, Biagotti GR, Leknes KN, Wikesjo UM.Oral tissue reactions to suture materials. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1998; 18:474-87.
21. Leknes KN, Selvig KA, Boe OE, Wikesjo UME. Tissue reactions to sutures in the presence or absence of anti-infective therapy. J Clin Periodontol 2005; 32:130-8.
22. Sharif MO, Coulthard P. Suturing: an update for dental the Update. 2011; 38:329-30, 332-4. practitioner. Dent
23. Vastani A, Maria A. Healing of intraoral wounds closed using cyanoacrylate glue: a comparative clinical and histologic study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013; 71:241-8. isoamyl 2
24. Mc Caul LK, Bagg J, Jenkins WM. Rate of loss of polyglactin 910 (Vicryl Rapid) from the mouth: A prospective clinical study. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2000; 38:328-30.
25. Fomete B, Saheeb BD, Obiadazie AC.A prospective clinical evaluation of the longevity of resorbable sutures in oral surgical procedures. Niger J Clin Pract. 2013; 16:334-8.
26. Munton CGF, Phillips CI, Martin B, Bartholomew RS, Capperauld I. A new synthetic absorbable suture in ophthalmic surgery. Br J Ophthal 1974; 58:941.
27. Pinheiro AL, DeCastro JF, Thiers FA, Colvalcanti ET, Rego TI, Di Quevedo AS, Using novafil: Would it make suturing easier? Braz Dent J 1997; 8:21-5.
28. Edlich RF, Drake DB, Rodeheaver GT, Winters KL, Greene JA, Gubler KD, Long WB , Britt LD, Winters SP, Scott CC, Lin KY. Syneture stainless STEEL suture. A collective review of its performance in surgical wound closure. J Long Term Eff Med Implants. 2006; 16:101-10.
29. Scher KS, Bernstein JM, Jones CW. Infectivity of vascular sutures. Am Surg 1985; 51:577-9.
30. Grigg TR, Liewehr FR, Patton WR, Buxton TB, MCPherson JC. Effect of the wicking behavior of multifilament sutures. J Endodont 2004; 30:649- 52.
31. Filho HN, Matsumato MA, Batista AL, Lopes LC, Desampawgoes FC, Consolaro A. Comparative study of tissue response to polyglecaprone 25,polyglactin 910 and polytetraflourethylene suture materials in rats. Braz Dent J 2002; 13:86- 91.
32. Yaltirik M, Dedeoglu K, Bilgic B, Kpray M, Erger H, Isserver H, Dulger O, Soley S. Comparison of four different suture materials in soft tissues of rats. Oral Dis 2003; 3:284-6.
33. Balamurugan R, Mohamed V, Katikaneni HK, Kumar KR. Clinical and histological acid suture with M, Pandey minor oral surgicalprocedure. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2012 Jul 1; 13:521-7. of polyglycolic
34. silk suture after 34. Kumar MS, Natta S, Shankar G, Reddy
35. SH, Visalakshi D, Seshiah GV. Comparison between
36. Silk Sutures and Cyanoacrylate Adhesive in Human
37. Mucosa- A Clinical and Histological Study. J
38. Int Oral Health. 2013; 5:95-100.
39. Parirok M, Asgary S, Eghbal MJ, Stowe S, Kakoei SA. Scanning electron microscope study of plaque accumulation on silk and PVDF suture materials in oral mucosa. Int Endodontic J 2004; 37:776-81.