Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 28, 2025
High-throughput Identification of Bacteria Repellent Polymers for Medical Devices
Published on: November 5, 2016
Biofilm Growth on Orthopaedic Cerclage Materials: Nonmetallic Polymers Are Less Resistant to Methicillin-Resistant
Kyle H Cichos1, Matthew C Christie2, Brent A Ponce3
1Hughston Foundation, Columbus, Georgia; Hughston Clinic, Columbus, Georgia.
Background:
Data on bacterial adhesion to cerclage cables are sparse. We aimed to compare 5 cerclage products for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) adhesion to determine the claim: Are nonmetallic polymer cables more resistant to bacterial adhesion than common metallic wires and cables?
Methods:
The following 5 cerclage products were compared: (1) monofilament stainless steel (SS) wires; (2) multifilament SS cables; (3) multifilament cobalt chrome cables; (4) multifilament Vitallium alloy (cobalt-chrome-molybdenum [Co-Cr-Mo]) cables; and (5) multifilament nonmetallic polymer cables. Each was cut into 2 cm lengths and placed into 12-well plates. Of the wells, 5 were wire or cables in trypticase soy broth with MRSA, with the remaining wells being appropriate controls incubated for 24 hours at 37° C and 5% CO2 with shaking. Wires and cables were prepared and randomly imaged via scanning electron microscopy, with bacterial counts performed on 3 images of 3 different wires or cables per study group. The scanning electron microscopy technician and counting investigator were blinded. Additionally, SS wire and polymer cables were analyzed by microcalorimetry for metabolic activity and bacterial load.
Results:
Bacterial attachment differed significantly between study groups in the middle section (P = .0003). Post hoc comparison showed no difference between groups individually (all P > .05) apart from polymer cables (median 551 bacteria) having significantly increased attached bacteria compared to the Vitallium alloy cable (157, P = .0004), SS cable (101, P = .0004), and SS wire (211, P = .0004). There was no difference between polymer and cobalt chrome cables (133, P = .056). Microcalorimetry supported these results, as polymer cables had a shorter time to max heat flow (6.2 versus 7.5 hours, P = .006), increased max heat flow (117 versus 64 uW, P = .045), and increased colony-forming units, indicating an increased bacterial load compared to SS wires.
Conclusions:
This in vitro study demonstrated that polymer cables have increased MRSA adhesion compared to common metallic wires and cables. Future studies are necessary to confirm the translation of increased bacterial adherence on polymer cables to increased rates of orthopaedic infections.
