Influence of suture physicochemical and surface topographic structure on tumor cell adherence

Abstract

Local recurrence following curative resection for colorectal cancer may be caused by the seeding of free malignant cells at the anastomotic site. This study investigated the influence of suture material on in vitro tumor cell adherence. Radiolabeled rat colonic cancer cells (RCC5) were incubated with a variety of suture materials, and the relative contribution of chemical composition and physical configuration to cell adherence was assessed. Nonadherent cells were washed free, and the cell adherence was determined by radioactive counting. Marked differences in adherence were observed, with cells preferentially adhering to protein-based and multifilament sutures. These observations were confirmed using scanning electron microscopy. These findings indicate that both chemical composition and physical configuration influence the adherence of tumor cells to sutures and suggest that the use of protein-based and multifilament sutures be carefully considered in situations where free malignant cells may be present following colorectal surgery.

Differential growth on sutures of tendon cells derived from torn human rotator cuff

“…This, coupled with relatively low rate of cell migration from the suture to plastic, suggests Ethiobond sutures provided a better surface for cell attachment in vitro. Multifilament sutures have been shown to be better surfaces for cell adhesion, 26 and this can probably be attributed to their patterned surface with ridges and grooves, ideal for cell adherence and alignment. 27 The braided nature of Ethibond has also been linked to excellent mechanical properties.…”

“…This may be related to relatively weak cell adhesion and spread on this smooth suture, as seen in the fluorescence images. In past studies, PDSII has been shown to have low cell adhesion rates of rat colonic cancer cells compared to other sutures 26 but good tissue engineering results using bone marrow cells. 39 There is little previous information on its interaction with tendon-derived cells.…”

Colorectal Diseases

“…No adjuvant therapy was recommended for patients with stage I rectal tumours (Dukes A), although patients with stage I1 and 111 tumours (Dukes B and C) should receive 5-FU or methyl-N-(2-chloroethy1)-N-cyclo-hexyl-N-nitrosourea (methyl-CCNU) and high-dose pelvic irradiation (45)(46)(47)(48)(49)(50)(51)(52)(53)(54)(55).…”

“…In April 1990 the NIH Consensus Development Conference produced a statement relating to adjuvant therapy for patients with colon and rectal In addition to recommending the adoption of the TNM system for staging colorectal cancer, they suggested that, based on 'high-quality studies', stage 111 patients (Dukes C) with colon cancer unable to enter a clinical trial should be offered 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and levamisol, but they did not recommend specific adjuvant therapy for patients with stage I or stage I1 disease (Dukes A and B). No adjuvant therapy was recommended for patients with stage I rectal tumours (Dukes A), although patients with stage I1 and 111 tumours (Dukes B and C) should receive 5-FU or methyl-N-(2-chloroethy1)-N-cyclo-hexyl-N-nitrosourea (methyl-CCNU) and high-dose pelvic irradiation (45)(46)(47)(48)(49)(50)(51)(52)(53)(54)(55).…”