ArticleCureus2025
The Efficacy of Ultraviolet Radiation in Decontaminating Dropped Bone Fragments in Orthopedic Surgery.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe dropping of bone after harvesting for grafting compromises sterility. Often, washing the bone with an antiseptic solution, harvesting a new autograft, or using an allograft is the only options. This study aims to determine the effectiveness of ultraviolet (UV) radiation in restoring the sterility of contaminated bone fragments and compare it to other commonly used methods for decontamination.
methodsThe excised bone was divided into five equal parts. One part was sent for culture without any treatment in a sterile environment. The other four parts were dropped sequentially on the theater floor, retrieved in a sterile manner, treated with either normal saline (NS), 5% povidone betadine solution (PBS), or a UV chamber, and sent for Gram stain and culture to assess growth.
resultsIt was observed that 23.6% (n = 9) of the samples dropped on the floor and, when cultured without treatment, showed Coagulase-negative Staphylococci (11.1%, n = 4) and aerobic spore bearers (13.8%, n = 5). After treatment with UV, 84.2% (n = 32) of the samples did not show any growth, and 86.8% (n = 33) of the samples did not show growth with PBS. There was a significant difference in growth between samples treated with NS and those treated with PBS or in the UV chamber. PBS solution was superior in the decontamination of bone.
conclusionTreatment in a UV chamber for five minutes was effective in restoring sterility to bone fragments dropped on the floor, but its effects on viability are not known. Future studies are needed to explore the role of UV radiation in the decontamination of bone and its maintenance of vitality.
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.