Suppr超能文献

您的手术头盔系统是否会破坏无菌区域?全关节置换术中污染风险与预防措施的系统评价。

Is Your Surgical Helmet System Compromising the Sterile Field? A Systematic Review of Contamination Risks and Preventive Measures in Total Joint Arthroplasty.

作者信息

Porto Joshua R, Lavu Monish S, Hecht Christian J, Kamath Atul F

机构信息

Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA.

Cleveland Orthopedic and Spine Institute, Cleveland, OH, USA.

出版信息

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2025 Feb 5. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003383.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Surgical helmet systems remain widely used in total joint arthroplasty (TJA) despite evidence to suggest that they may increase infection risk via contamination of sterile equipment and operating room air. However, the challenging nature of conducting high-quality clinical trials to study outcomes with low incidence, such as prosthetic joint infection (PJI), has made drawing definitive conclusions from the available experimental studies difficult. Therefore, a comprehensive analysis of the best available evidence is needed to clarify the association between surgical helmet system use and contamination and infection risk and to provide clinical recommendations for use in TJA.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: This systematic review aimed to address the following questions: (1) What is the level of sterility of surgical helmet systems and concomitantly used personal protective equipment (PPE)? (2) Is there an association between surgical helmet systems and air contamination within the operating room? (3) Does the use of a surgical helmet system affect wound contamination and/or infection?

METHODS

PubMed, Medline, EBSCOhost, and Google Scholar were queried on July 31, 2024, to identify studies published from inception to July 2024 that have evaluated the impact of surgical helmet system use in TJA on sterile field contamination (operating room air, PPE, sterile equipment), wound contamination and infection, or practices that may impact related outcomes. Inclusion criteria were that the study evaluate the sterility, donning, or intraoperative use (including mock TJA) of a surgical helmet system in association with contamination or infection. The following articles were excluded: case reports, case series, reviews, commentaries, editorials, duplicate studies among databases, gray literature, studies specific to a procedure other than TJA, and studies unavailable as a full-text English manuscript. After screening 536 articles, 21 were included. The 13 studies that evaluated the sterility of surgical helmet systems and concomitantly used PPE comprised 126 gowning simulations, 445 mock TJA procedures, and 191 patients who had undergone TJA. The seven studies that evaluated contamination of operating room air comprised 38 gowning simulations, 82 mock TJA procedures, and 96 patients who had undergone TJA. Three studies directly evaluated wound contamination or infection, comprising 83,888 patients who had undergone TJA. Risk of bias was determined via the Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies (MINORS) tool, with a mean ± SD score of 20 ± 1.4 (of 24) for comparative studies and 14 ± 0.8 (of 16) for noncomparative studies, indicating good study quality. Notably, the quality of evidence was limited by the inclusion of experimental study designs that did not directly measure infection; however, the inclusion of such studies is necessitated by the infeasibly large study population required to directly evaluate the association between surgical helmet systems and infection prospectively. Heterogeneity among studies precluded meta-analysis, and a qualitative synthesis was instead conducted.

RESULTS

The best available evidence suggests that surgical helmet systems frequently harbor microbes known to be common causes of SSI and PJI, and that their improper donning and use (for example, activation of the exhaust fan before fully gowned) can lead to the contamination of gowns and sterile gloves worn by surgical personnel. Furthermore, several studies suggest that the exhaust from surgical helmet systems presents a potential source of operating room air contamination, although there were mixed findings based on the location of air sampling and whether or not a toga was used and the gown-glove interface was sealed (both of which were shown to mitigate airborne contaminants). However, whether there is a direct association between surgical helmet system use and wound infection remains understudied and unclear, with one retrospective comparative analysis demonstrating no difference in odds of infection when comparing surgical helmet systems used to a standard gown during TJA, and another reporting reduced odds of revision for deep infection with a 12-month follow-up time when a surgical helmet system was used (adjusted OR 0.55).

CONCLUSION

Although the best available evidence suggests that the use of surgical helmet systems in TJA can increase the likelihood of sterile field contamination, including sterile surgical attire and equipment, as well as operating room air, that finding derives largely from experimental studies with effect sizes (based on endpoints like colony counts) that are difficult or impossible to convert to real-world infection risk. Robust investigations into the association between surgical helmet systems and infection are limited by the need for infeasibly large study populations to conduct sufficiently powered clinical trials, with no evidence found by this review to directly implicate surgical helmet systems in increased infection risk. Still, because the risk for contamination has been shown to be driven substantially by donning technique and the type of gown used, we recommend waiting to activate the surgical helmet system fan until fully gowned, taping the gown cuff at the inner glove, utilizing a toga system set up, and implementing sterilization protocols for reusable helmets.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

When used appropriately, there is insufficient high-quality evidence to suggest that surgical helmet systems pose meaningful harm to patient safety. However, the persistent lack of evidence to demonstrate their effectiveness in achieving the initial purpose of reducing infection warrants careful evaluation of their utility in TJA. Ample consideration must be given to their role as personal protection systems for surgical personnel, as studies have demonstrated superior protection from surgical debris and splatter compared with conventional surgical attire. While the added cost of surgical helmet systems may therefore be justified, surgeons wishing to continue utilizing surgical helmet systems in their practice should do so while taking proper precautionary measures to mitigate contamination risks.

摘要

背景

尽管有证据表明手术头盔系统可能通过污染无菌设备和手术室空气增加感染风险,但在全关节置换术(TJA)中仍被广泛使用。然而,开展高质量临床试验以研究低发病率结局(如假体关节感染(PJI))具有挑战性,这使得从现有实验研究中得出明确结论变得困难。因此,需要对现有最佳证据进行全面分析,以阐明手术头盔系统的使用与污染及感染风险之间的关联,并为TJA的使用提供临床建议。

问题/目的:本系统评价旨在解决以下问题:(1)手术头盔系统及同时使用的个人防护装备(PPE)的无菌水平如何?(2)手术头盔系统与手术室内空气污染之间是否存在关联?(3)使用手术头盔系统是否会影响伤口污染和/或感染?

方法

2024年7月31日检索了PubMed、Medline、EBSCOhost和谷歌学术,以识别从开始到2024年7月发表的评估手术头盔系统在TJA中使用对无菌区域污染(手术室空气、PPE、无菌设备)、伤口污染和感染或可能影响相关结局的操作的影响的研究。纳入标准是该研究评估手术头盔系统的无菌性、穿戴或术中使用(包括模拟TJA)与污染或感染的关系。排除以下文章:病例报告、病例系列、综述、评论、社论、数据库中的重复研究、灰色文献、TJA以外特定手术的研究以及无法获取全文英文手稿的研究。筛选536篇文章后,纳入21篇。评估手术头盔系统及同时使用的PPE无菌性的13项研究包括126次穿手术衣模拟、445次模拟TJA手术和191例接受TJA的患者。评估手术室空气污染的7项研究包括38次穿手术衣模拟、82次模拟TJA手术和96例接受TJA的患者。3项研究直接评估伤口污染或感染,包括83888例接受TJA的患者。通过非随机研究方法学指数(MINORS)工具确定偏倚风险,比较研究的平均±标准差评分为20±1.4(满分24分),非比较研究为14±0.8(满分16分),表明研究质量良好。值得注意的是,证据质量受到纳入未直接测量感染的实验研究设计的限制;然而,由于前瞻性直接评估手术头盔系统与感染之间的关联所需的研究人群规模过大,不切实际,因此必须纳入此类研究。研究之间的异质性排除了进行荟萃分析的可能性,因此进行了定性综合分析。

结果

现有最佳证据表明,手术头盔系统经常携带已知是手术部位感染(SSI)和PJI常见原因的微生物,其穿戴和使用不当(例如,在完全穿好手术衣之前启动排气扇)会导致手术人员所穿手术衣和无菌手套受到污染。此外,多项研究表明,手术头盔系统的排气是手术室空气污染的潜在来源,尽管根据空气采样位置以及是否使用长袍和手术衣-手套接口是否密封(两者均显示可减轻空气传播污染物)的不同,研究结果存在差异。然而,手术头盔系统的使用与伤口感染之间是否存在直接关联仍研究不足且尚不清楚,一项回顾性比较分析表明,在TJA期间将使用的手术头盔系统与标准手术衣进行比较时,感染几率没有差异,另一项报告显示,使用手术头盔系统且随访12个月时,深部感染翻修几率降低(调整后比值比0.55)。

结论

尽管现有最佳证据表明,在TJA中使用手术头盔系统会增加无菌区域污染的可能性,包括无菌手术服装和设备以及手术室空气,但这一发现主要来自实验研究,其效应大小(基于菌落计数等终点)难以或无法转化为实际感染风险。由于进行足够有力的临床试验需要不切实际的大量研究人群,因此对手术头盔系统与感染之间关联的有力研究受到限制,本综述未发现证据直接表明手术头盔系统会增加感染风险。不过,由于已表明污染风险在很大程度上受穿戴技术和所使用手术衣类型的驱动,我们建议在完全穿好手术衣后再启动手术头盔系统风扇,在内手套处用胶带粘贴手术衣袖口,使用长袍系统设置,并对可重复使用的头盔实施灭菌方案。

临床意义

如果使用得当,没有足够的高质量证据表明手术头盔系统会对患者安全造成重大危害。然而,持续缺乏证据证明其在实现降低感染这一初始目的方面的有效性,这值得仔细评估其在TJA中的实用性。必须充分考虑其作为手术人员个人防护系统的作用,因为研究表明,与传统手术服装相比,它能更好地防护手术碎片和飞溅物。因此,手术头盔系统增加的成本可能是合理的,希望在实践中继续使用手术头盔系统的外科医生应采取适当的预防措施以降低污染风险。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验