Preventing Bacterial Contamination of Breast Implants Using Infection Mitigation Techniques: An In Vitro Study.


Journal

Aesthetic surgery journal
ISSN: 1527-330X
Titre abrégé: Aesthet Surg J
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9707469

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
30 Jan 2024
Historique:
received: 04 12 2023
revised: 15 01 2024
accepted: 19 01 2024
medline: 30 1 2024
pubmed: 30 1 2024
entrez: 30 1 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Bacterial contamination of implants has been linked to the formation of biofilm and subsequent infection, capsular contracture and Breast Implant Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma. Reducing contamination during implant insertion should therefore reduce biofilm formation disease sequelae. Compare levels of contamination between preventative techniques. A model to simulate the passage of implants through a skin incision was designed using a sterile textured polyvinyl plastic sheet contaminated with Staphylococcus epidermidis. Implants were subject to infection mitigation techniques and passed through the incision, then placed onto horse blood agar plates and incubated for 24 hours.Part 2 of the study applied the same contamination to human abdominal wall specimens) 5 cm incision was made through skin and fat, then implants were passed and levels of contamination were measured as described. Smooth implants were seen to grow a mean of 95CFU (approximately 1CFU/cm2) and textured implants grew 86CFU (also approximately 1CFU/cm2). CFU counts were analysed using the Mann Whitney U test which showed no significant difference between implant types (P < 0.05). Significant difference shown using independent samples T-tests. The dependent variable techniques were then compared as groups using one way ANOVA and this also showed a significant reduction when compared to the control group (p < 0.01). This study has shown in-vitro the effectiveness of antiseptic rinse and skin/implant barrier techniques to reduce bacterial contamination of breast implants at the time of insertion.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Bacterial contamination of implants has been linked to the formation of biofilm and subsequent infection, capsular contracture and Breast Implant Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma. Reducing contamination during implant insertion should therefore reduce biofilm formation disease sequelae.
OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVE
Compare levels of contamination between preventative techniques.
METHODS METHODS
A model to simulate the passage of implants through a skin incision was designed using a sterile textured polyvinyl plastic sheet contaminated with Staphylococcus epidermidis. Implants were subject to infection mitigation techniques and passed through the incision, then placed onto horse blood agar plates and incubated for 24 hours.Part 2 of the study applied the same contamination to human abdominal wall specimens) 5 cm incision was made through skin and fat, then implants were passed and levels of contamination were measured as described.
RESULTS RESULTS
Smooth implants were seen to grow a mean of 95CFU (approximately 1CFU/cm2) and textured implants grew 86CFU (also approximately 1CFU/cm2). CFU counts were analysed using the Mann Whitney U test which showed no significant difference between implant types (P < 0.05). Significant difference shown using independent samples T-tests. The dependent variable techniques were then compared as groups using one way ANOVA and this also showed a significant reduction when compared to the control group (p < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
This study has shown in-vitro the effectiveness of antiseptic rinse and skin/implant barrier techniques to reduce bacterial contamination of breast implants at the time of insertion.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38290053
pii: 7593493
doi: 10.1093/asj/sjae013
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Aesthetic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Auteurs

Oliver Chow (O)

Plastic surgeons, Macquarie University Hospital, Sydney, Australia.

Helen Hu (H)

Plastic surgeons, Macquarie University Hospital, Sydney, Australia.

Sepehr Lajevardi (S)

Plastic surgeons, Macquarie University Hospital, Sydney, Australia.

Anand K Deva (AK)

Plastic surgeons, Macquarie University Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
International editor for Aesthetic Surgery Journal.

Richard Atkinson (R)

Plastic surgeons, Macquarie University Hospital, Sydney, Australia.

Classifications MeSH