Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41490042›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Cell salvage in bacterially contaminated surgical fields - A scoping review.

Joeri Slob, Pim Hondebrink, Ankie W M M Koopman-van Gemert, Margriet E van Baar, Cornelis H van der Vlies, Seppe S H A Koopman

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Joeri SlobAlliance of Dutch Burn Care (ADBC), Burn Center, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9323-4986
Pim HondebrinkFaculty of Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-1347-0143
Ankie W M M Koopman-van GemertDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Margriet E van BaarAlliance of Dutch Burn Care (ADBC), Burn Center, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5823-7375
Cornelis H van der VliesAlliance of Dutch Burn Care (ADBC), Burn Center, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Seppe S H A KoopmanDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3704-8492

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis scoping review systematically examines the use of intraoperative cell salvage in bacterially contaminated surgical settings, examining contamination levels, decontamination strategies, and clinical outcomes following the reinfusion of contaminated salvaged blood.

methodsFollowing the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews, comprehensive searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL. Eligible studies included primary empirical research reporting bacterial contamination of salvaged blood confirmed by culture, as well as studies reporting on decontamination strategies or clinical outcomes following reinfusion, across any surgical setting. Data was extracted and synthesized descriptively. Key findings were summarized in structured tables.

resultsThirty-nine studies, involving 1654 patient, met the inclusion criteria. Bacterial contamination was consistently reported, with positive culture rates varying widely. Methodological quality was assessed for all studies, except the ex-vivo studies. Decontamination strategies, including leukocyte depletion filtration (10 studies) and antibiotic additives (4 studies), reduced contamination, though effectiveness varied. Among 26 studies, involving 1203 patients, who received reinfused salvaged blood, postoperative infections were reported in 15 studies. A total of 55 cases of postoperative bacteraemia were identified. Only five studies described a plausible microbiological link between the reinfused blood and subsequent infection, involving nine patients in whom the isolated pathogen matched the organism cultured from the salvaged blood.

conclusionBacterial contamination of salvaged blood occurred frequently, even in procedures not typically classified as contaminated. Decontamination strategies demonstrated variable effectiveness in reducing bacterial contamination. Despite contamination, a potential microbiological link between reinfused salvaged blood and infection was described in only nine patients across five studies. However, substantial heterogeneity in methodologies and a small sample size of most studies makes it difficult to draw definite conclusions about safety. Therefore, we would advise to use cell salvage in known bacterial contaminated areas on a case by case basis, after careful evaluation of the pros and cons, until future research defined safe contamination thresholds, evaluated the effectiveness of decontamination techniques, and assessed clinical outcomes in standardized and controlled settings.

Indexed as

BacteremiaBacteriaBlood Transfusion, AutologousOperative Blood SalvageDecontaminationHumans

Identifiers

PMID41490042
PMCPMC12768276

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.