ArticleCell and tissue banking2017
Analysis of potential factors affecting allografts contamination at retrieval.
Article in Cell and tissue banking, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bioburden of postmortem bone tissues with a procurement time exceeding 36 h.Cell and tissue banking · 2025Article
- A local, non-commercial tissue bank connected to an organ donor program can produce musculoskeletal allografts of uniform quality at very low costs - ten years' experience.Cell and tissue banking · 2024Article
- Cyclic Stability of Locking Plate Augmented with Intramedullary Polymethyl Methacrylate (PMMA) Strut Fixation for Osteoporotic Humeral Fractures: A Biomechanical Study.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Microbiological assessment of arterial allografts processed in a tissue bank.Cell and tissue banking · 2021Article
- Experimental procedures for decontamination and microbiological testing in cardiovascular tissue banks.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The microbiological contamination of retrieved tissues has become a very important topic and it is a critical aspect in the safety of allografts, especially from multi-tissue donors whose tissues are frequently contaminated as a consequence of retrieval. We analysed a total of 10,107 tissues, 8178 musculoskeletal and 1929 cardiovascular tissues, retrieved from 978 multi-tissue donors. Of these, 159 heart-beating donors (HBD) were also organ donors, while the remaining 819 non-heart-beating donors (NHBD) were tissue donors only. A multivariate logistic model was used to determine the factors affecting contamination risk during retrieval. In the model, the dependent variable was the presence/absence of contamination while the covariates included were: gender, type of donor, age of donor, cause of death, previous skin donation, cadaver time, number of people attending the retrieval, number of tissues retrieved. Moreover, a second log-linear model was used to determine the number of strains isolated per tissue. Tissue contamination was statistically correlated with gender, type of donor, cadaver time, number of people attending the retrieval and season. In conclusion, to minimize the risk of bacterial contamination, aseptic techniques should be used at retrieval, with the number of retrieval team members kept to a minimum. In addition, cadaver time should be as short as possible and the donor should be refrigerated within a few hours after death.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.