ArticleCell and tissue banking2025
Comparing the efficacy of two antibiotic cocktails in decontamination of cardiovascular tissues.
Article in Cell and tissue banking, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Seven-year experience (2018-2025) of a hospital-based cardiovascular tissue bank in Israel: operational insights and clinical impact.Cell and tissue banking · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiovascular allografts are essential for patients with severe cardiovascular diseases. Yet, microbial contamination of the grafts poses a life-threatening risk to recipients. Tissue banks utilize various decontamination methods during cardiovascular tissue processing, often involving antibiotic solutions. This study compares the efficacy of an in-house prepared antibiotic cocktail (tissue bank cocktail) and a commercially available solution (BASE.128) in decontaminating cardiovascular tissues. For this study, the efficacy of the two antibiotic cocktails was compared through quantitative comparisons against challenge microorganisms, and retrospective analysis of routine sterility tests. Both solutions demonstrated comparable decontamination efficiency against challenge strains, achieving significant reductions in bacterial load. However, retrospective sterility tests revealed that while both antibiotic solutions were highly effective in decontaminating cardiovascular allografts, the use of BASE.128 followed a tenfold increase in contamination rates compared to the tissue bank cocktail, primarily due to a slow-growing non-tuberculous mycobacteria strain. These findings highlight the importance of tailored decontamination protocols that consider prevalent microbial contaminants while preserving tissue quality.
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.