ArticleMedicine2021
Does washing medical devices before and after use decrease bacterial contamination?: An in vitro study.
Article in Medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Use of Laparoscopic Camera Sleeve in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: An Innovative "No-Touch" Technique.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- Keller Funnel Efficacy in "No Touch" Breast Augmentation and Reconstruction: A Systematic Review.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2022Article
- Efficacy of Povidone Iodine Against Microbial Biofilms in Breast Implants With Different Textures: Results From anFrontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractSurface treatment of medical devices may be a way of avoiding the need for replacement of these devices and the comorbidities associated with infection. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether pre- and postcontamination washing of 2 prostheses with different textures can decrease bacterial contamination.The following microorganisms were evaluated: Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Proteus mirabilis and Enterococcus faecalis. Silicone and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene vascular prostheses were used and divided into 3 groups: prostheses contaminated; prostheses contaminated and treated before contamination; and prostheses contaminated and treated after contamination. Treatments were performed with antibiotic solution, chlorhexidine and lidocaine. After one week of incubation, the prostheses were sown in culture medium, which was incubated for 48 hours. The area of colony formation was evaluated by fractal dimension, an image analysis tool.The antibiotic solution inhibited the growth of S epidermidis and chlorhexidine decrease in 53% the colonization density for S aureus in for both prostheses in the pre-washing. In postcontamination washing, the antibiotic solution inhibited the growth of all bacteria evaluated; there was a 60% decrease in the colonization density of S aureus and absence of colonization for E faecalis with chlorhexidine; and lidocaine inhibited the growth of S aureus in both prostheses.Antibiotic solution showed the highest efficiency in inhibiting bacterial growth, especially for S epidermidis, in both washings. Lidocaine was able to reduce colonization by S aureus in post-contamination washing, showing that it can be used as an alternative adjuvant treatment in these cases.
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.