It's interesting to me, I learned an oral history in grad school that's somewhat different from the wiki record. This isn't the first time that it's happened and it's a lesson that history goes to the documentation.

I was told that it's development was tied to looking for suture alternatives and it was abandoned due to inflammation and rough edges on application.

The lesson, for me, is to be cautious about relying on single sources. I am enough of an expert in my areas (and this is not one of them) to be pretty suspicious of Wikipedia.