Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27788747›Full record

SynthesisDeutsches Arzteblatt international2016

The Risk of Bacterial Infection After Tattooing.

Ralf Dieckmann, Ides Boone, Stefan O Brockmann, Jens A Hammerl, Annette Kolb-Mäurer, Matthias Goebeler, Andreas Luch, Sascha Al Dahouk

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
69.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 71 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. [Useful knowledge regarding tattoos].Dermatologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Immune Response in Laser Tattoo Removal: A Systematic Review.Journal of lasers in medical sciences · 2023
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ralf DieckmannGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Department of Biological Safety, Berlin, Regional Public Health Office, Department for Infection Control, Reutlingen, University Hospital Würzburg, Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, Würzburg, German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Department of Chemical and Product Safety, Berlin, RWTH Aachen University Hospital, Clinic for Gastroenterology, Metabolic Disorders and Internal Intensive Medicine (Medical Clinic III), Aachen.
Ides Boone
Stefan O Brockmann
Jens A Hammerl
Annette Kolb-Mäurer
Matthias Goebeler
Andreas Luch
Sascha Al Dahouk
Federal Institute for Risk Assessment · DEReutlingen University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTattooing is a globally growing trend. Overall prevalence among adults in industrialized countries is around 10-20%. Given the high and increasing numbers of tattooed people worldwide, medical and public health implications emerging from tattooing trends require greater attention not only by the public, but also by medical professionals and health policy makers.

methodsWe performed a systematic review of the literature on tattooassociated bacterial infections and bacterial contamination of tattoo inks. Furthermore, we surveyed tattoo inks sampled during an international tattoo convention in Germany to study their microbial status.

resultsOur systematic review identified 67 cases published between 1984 and 2015, mainly documenting serious bacterial infectious complications after intradermal deposition of tattoo inks. Both local skin infections (e.g. abscesses, necrotizing fasciitis) and systemic infections (e.g. endocarditis, septic shock) were reported. Published bacteriological surveys showed that opened as well as unopened tattoo ink bottles frequently contained clinically relevant levels of bacteria indicating that the manufactured tattoo product itself may be a source of infection. In our bacteriological survey, two of 39 colorants were contaminated with aerobic mesophilic bacteria.

conclusionInappropriate hygiene measures in tattoo parlors and non-medical wound care are major risk factors for tattoo-related infections. In addition, facultative pathogenic bacterial species can be isolated from tattoo inks in use, which may pose a serious health risk.

Indexed as

Bacterial InfectionsGermanyHumansInkRisk FactorsTattooing

Identifiers

PMID27788747
PMCPMC5290255
OpenAlexW2548321315

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.