• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • Search
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2026 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • SAGES Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • MIS Fellows Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
  • Opportunities
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs and Humanitarian Efforts
  • Search
    • Search the SAGES Site
    • Guidelines Search
    • Video Search
    • Search Images
    • Search Abstracts
  • OWLS/FLS
  • Login
You are here: Home / Abstracts / DOES RE-ANIMATING LAPAROSCOPIC MESH IN LOCAL ANESTHETIC CONFER AN ANTIMICROBIAL EFFECT?

DOES RE-ANIMATING LAPAROSCOPIC MESH IN LOCAL ANESTHETIC CONFER AN ANTIMICROBIAL EFFECT?

Gary Ko, MD, Darren Siu, BScH, Lewis Tomalty, PhD, David Robertson, MD. Queen’s University

INTRODUCTION: Previous studies have demonstrated that local anesthetics have antimicrobial effects, but there have been none looking at these effects on hernia mesh. 

METHODS: The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of lidocaine, bupivacaine, and cefazolin were determined on strains of methicillin-sensitive and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis using a micro broth dilution method. The agents were then introduced in combination with an anti-adhesive coated polypropylene mesh to determine changes to the MIC. The fractional inhibitory concentration (FIC) index for each agent was calculated to determine whether if the changes seen were additive or synergistic.

RESULTS: Lidocaine did not exert an antimicrobial effect on S. aureus or S. epidermidis. Bupivacaine and cefazolin each produced inhibitory effects on these organisms. The introduction of the coated polyproylene mesh eliminated the antimicrobial effect of bupivacaine, but the antimicrobial effect of cefazolin was unaltered. An additive effect was noted when bupivacaine and cefazolin were used together on methicillin-sensitive S. aureusand S. epidermis. A synergistic effect was seen when bupivacaine and cefazolin were used together on methicillin-resistant S. aureus and S. epidermis. Furthermore, these effects were preserved in the presence of mesh.

CONCLUSION: Local anesthetics exhibit varying degrees of antimicrobial activity. This effect was synergistic when used with cefazolin on methicillin-resistant organisms and was preserved when used with coated polypropylene mesh.


Presented at the SAGES 2017 Annual Meeting in Houston, TX.

Abstract ID: 87048

Program Number: P038

Presentation Session: iPoster Session (Non CME)

Presentation Type: Poster

39


  • Foundation
  • SAGES.TV
  • MyCME
  • Educational Activities

Copyright © 2025 Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons