ArticleMedicine2026
Bacterial contamination of surgical blades, suction tips, and iodophor drapes in primary joint arthroplasty: A prospective cohort study.
Article in Medicine, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intraoperative bacterial contamination may contribute to microbial transmission during joint arthroplasty, but its distribution across surgical devices and clinical significance remain uncertain. This study aimed to characterize intraoperative bacterial contamination, compare contamination-positive and contamination-negative patients, evaluate contamination across device types, and assess postoperative infection outcomes. This prospective cohort study included 127 patients undergoing primary joint arthroplasty between February 2016 and April 2017. Samples from an unused control blade, skin-incision blade, deep-tissue blade, povidone-iodine-impregnated drape, and suction tip underwent aerobic and anaerobic culture. Patients were classified according to whether at least 1 specimen yielded bacterial growth. Patient-level characteristics were compared between contamination-positive and contamination-negative groups. Device-specific contamination was compared using generalized estimating equations (GEE) to account for within-patient correlation. Patients were followed for 24 to 38 months. A total of 13 of 127 patients (10.2%) had at least 1 positive culture. After exclusion of suspected sampling or transport contamination, positivity rates were 1.7% for control blades, 5.9% for skin-incision blades, 0.8% for deep-tissue blades, 2.5% for povidone-iodine-impregnated drapes, and 2.6% for suction tips. Patient-level demographic, surgical, and comorbidity characteristics did not differ significantly between groups. Overall contamination rates differed significantly among device types (GEE Wald χ2 = 15.14, df = 4; P = .004), although no individual device differed significantly from the control blade; for skin-incision blades, OR = 3.65 (95% CI, 0.73-18.27; P = .116). No surgical-site infections, periprosthetic joint infection, or deep soft-tissue infection occurred during follow-up. Intraoperative bacterial contamination occurred across multiple surgical devices despite standardized perioperative measures, with overall contamination rates differing by device type. Skin-incision blades had the highest observed positivity rate, but no device showed a statistically significant increase versus the control blade. The absence of postoperative infection underscores the distinction between microbiological contamination and clinical infection.
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.