Analysis of microbial load on surgical instruments after clinical use and following manual and automated cleaning

• Published in: American journal of infection control Vol. 43; no. 5; pp. 522 - 527
• Main Authors: Evangelista, Síntia de Souza, MSc, dos Santos, Simone Gonçalves, PhD, de Resende Stoianoff, Maria Aparecida, PhD, de Oliveira, Adriana Cristina, PhD
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01.05.2015; Mosby-Year Book, Inc
• Subjects: Bacteria; Bacteria - isolation & purification; Bacterial Load; Brazil; Decontamination - methods; Disinfection - methods; Hospitals; Humans; Infection Control; Infectious Disease; Infectious diseases; Medical device reprocessing; Medical equipment; Microbiology; Patient safety; Surgical Instruments - microbiology; Brazil; Patient safety; Microbiology; Medical device reprocessing; Infection Control
• ISSN: 0196-6553; 1527-3296
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2014.12.018

Background We aimed to monitor the microbial load and identify the microorganisms recovered from surgical instruments after clinical use and following manual and automated cleaning. Methods This experimental study was carried out in the Laboratory of Oral Microbiology and Anaerobes at the Federal University of Minas Gerais in Brazil. Microbial samples were taken from 125 surgical instruments used in 25 types of gastrointestinal surgeries. Results The average microbial load was 93.1 CFU/100 mL after clinical use and 41 CFU/100 mL and 8.24 CFU/100 mL on instruments following 2 sequential steps of manual cleaning, respectively, and 75 CFU/100 mL and 16.1 CFU/100 mL on instruments after automated cleaning. Surgical wound classification significantly affected the microbial load recovered on instruments. Coagulase-negative Staphylococcus , Escherichia coli , Pseudomonas spp, Stenotrophomonas maltophilia , and Acinetobacter baumannii complex were recovered. Conclusions The average microbial load observed after the cleaning steps decreased, and the decrease in microbial load was more pronounced using the manual method compared with that observed using the automated method.