J. G. Graham, N. J. Hickok, S. Knott, C. Purtill, D. Martin, P. K. Beredjiklian, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Rothman Institute, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA A. F. Chen, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2019 Jun;477(6):1508-1513. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000651.
Surgeons frequently use optical loupes to magnify the surgical field; they are typically unprotected when positioned directly over the wound, where particulate shedding containing microorganisms could potentially lead to surgical site infections (SSIs). SSIs are rare in some orthopaedic subspecialties such as hand surgery; however, in other subspecialties, for example, the spine, where surgeons often use loupes, SSIs can have devastating consequences.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What is the degree of bacterial and fungi organism colonization of surgical loupes and storage cases? (2) Is there a difference in the degree of colonization at the beginning and the end of a surgery day? (3) Does an alcohol swab reduce bacterial colonization of surgical loupes?
The surgical loupes of 21 orthopaedic surgeons from a large, regional orthopaedic practice were cultured over a 3-month period and form the basis of this study. Five loupe storage cases were also cultured. In two different subgroup comparisons, the presence of microorganisms was evaluated just before the start and immediately after the end of the surgical day (n = 9) and before and 1 minute after cleaning with an alcohol swab (n = 6). A total of 36 cultures were evaluated. Surgeons who declined to participate in the study were excluded. The number of loupes selected for all of the analyses were samples of convenience and limited by surgeon availability. The degree of bacterial and fungal presence was graded using a point system: 0 = no growth; 1 = limited growth (meaning few scattered colonies); 2 = moderate growth; 3 = extensive but scattered growth; and 4 = growth consuming the entire plate. Demographic data were assessed using descriptive statistics. Additionally, the Student's t and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to detect differences in categorical bacterial growth between paired samples. A p value of 0.05 represented statistical significance. Kappa statistics of reliability were performed to evaluate interobserver agreement of microorganism growth in the culture plates.
Bacteria were present in 19 of 21 (90%) sets of loupes. Five species of bacteria were noted. Fungi were present in 10 of 21 (48%) sets of loupes. Bacterial contamination was identified in two storage cases (40%) and fungi were present in five cases (100%). In a subset of nine loupes tested, the degree of bacterial presence had a median of 2 (range, 1-4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0-2.6) in samples collected before starting the surgical day compared with 3 (range, 2-4; 95% CI, 2.0-3.3) at the end of the day (p = 0.004). In a separate study arm comprised of six loupes, 1 minute after being cleaned with an alcohol swab, bacterial presence on loupes decreased from a median of 2 (range, 2-3; 95% CI, 1.9-2.5) to a median of 1 (range, 0-2; 95% CI, 0.5-1.5; p = 0.012).
Loupes are a common reservoir for bacteria and fungi. Given the use of loupes directly over the surgical field and the lack of a barrier, care should be taken to decrease the bacterial load by cleaning loupes and airing out storage cases, which may decrease the risk of surgical field contamination and iatrogenic wound infections.
Routine cleaning and disinfecting of optical loupes with alcohol pads can reduce microorganism colonization and should be implemented by surgeons who regularly use loupes in the operating room. Theoretically, particulate shedding from the loupes into the surgical field containing microorganisms could increase the risk of SSI, although this has not been proven clinically.
外科医生经常使用光学放大镜来放大手术区域;当它们直接放置在伤口上方时,通常没有任何保护措施,而伤口上方可能会有含有微生物的微粒脱落,从而导致手术部位感染(SSI)。在一些骨科亚专业中,如手外科,SSI 很少见;然而,在其他亚专业中,例如脊柱外科,外科医生经常使用放大镜,SSI 可能会产生毁灭性的后果。
问题/目的:(1)手术放大镜和存储盒的细菌和真菌生物污染程度如何?(2)手术日开始和结束时的定植程度是否存在差异?(3)酒精擦拭能否减少手术放大镜的细菌定植?
这项研究的基础是对来自一家大型地区性骨科实践的 21 名骨科医生的手术放大镜进行了为期 3 个月的培养。同时还培养了 5 个放大镜存储盒。在两个不同的亚组比较中,评估了在手术日开始前和结束后(n = 9)以及使用酒精擦拭前后(n = 6)微生物的存在情况。共评估了 36 个培养物。拒绝参与研究的医生被排除在外。所有分析的放大镜数量都是方便选择的样本,并且受到医生可用性的限制。使用评分系统评估细菌和真菌存在的程度:0 = 无生长;1 = 有限生长(意味着只有少数分散的菌落);2 = 中度生长;3 = 广泛但分散的生长;4 = 消耗整个平板的生长。使用描述性统计评估人口统计学数据。此外,使用学生 t 检验和 Wilcoxon 符号秩检验检测配对样本中细菌生长的分类差异。p 值为 0.05 表示具有统计学意义。进行 Kappa 可靠性统计评估以评估培养平板中微生物生长的观察者间一致性。
21 套放大镜中有 19 套(90%)存在细菌。发现了 5 种细菌。21 套放大镜中有 10 套(48%)存在真菌。两个存储盒(40%)存在细菌污染,五个存储盒(100%)存在真菌。在 9 个放大镜样本的子集中,与手术日开始时相比,手术日结束时的细菌存在程度中位数为 3(范围,2-4;95%置信区间 [CI],2.0-3.3)(p = 0.004)。在一个单独的研究臂中,包括 6 个放大镜,使用酒精擦拭 1 分钟后,放大镜上的细菌存在程度从中位数 2(范围,2-3;95%CI,1.9-2.5)降低到中位数 1(范围,0-2;95%CI,0.5-1.5;p = 0.012)。
放大镜是细菌和真菌的常见储存库。鉴于放大镜直接放置在手术区域上方,且没有屏障,因此应通过清洁放大镜并使存储盒通风来减少细菌负荷,这可能会降低手术区域污染和医源性伤口感染的风险。
定期用酒精垫清洁光学放大镜可以减少微生物定植,经常在手术室使用放大镜的外科医生应实施此操作。理论上,放大镜上的微粒脱落到含有微生物的手术区域中,可能会增加 SSI 的风险,尽管这尚未在临床上得到证实。