» Articles » PMID: 24426327

Impact of Donor Arm Cleaning with Different Aseptic Solutions for Prevention of Contamination in Blood Bags

Overview
Specialty Hematology
Date 2014 Jan 16
PMID 24426327
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Transfusion associated sepsis cases are encountered occasionally and bacterial transmission remains the major cause. The goal of our study was to compare the efficacy of disinfectants in phlebotomy site preparation. After selection of donor the antecubital fossa area of the arm was disinfected with different types of disinfectants namely sprit (70% isopropyl alcohol), povidone iodine (0.5% w/v available iodine in distilled water), savlon (1.5% v/v chlorhexidine gluconate solution and 3.0% cetrimide solution) and combination of sprit and povidone iodine. Swabs were collected from 20 donors using a sterile forceps, after cleaning with different antiseptic solutions. Swab was streaked on blood agar plate aseptically and the plate was incubated at 37°C for 24 h. Colonies were counted and a single colony was re-cultured by growing on nutrient and Mac-Conkey agar. The biochemical characteristics were determined by performing Gram staining, Motility, Catalase and Oxidase tests. The mean values of colonies were significantly higher with savlon compared to other three solutions. The difference was statistically significant by "t" test (t values 1.7-3.0; P < 0.05). Staphylococcus epidermidis, Staphylococcus sp., Streptococcus sp., Micrococcus sp., Bacillus megaterium and Bacillus cereus were the organisms identified. After completion of bleeding, samples from the bag were aseptically inoculated in aerobic and anaerobic culture bottles to be tested on BacT/Alert system. The bag containing donor's blood did not show any contamination when three cleanings were carried out using sprit, povidone iodine and spirit respectively.

Citing Articles

Controlling Infectious Risk in Transfusion: Assessing the Effectiveness of Skin Disinfection in Blood Donors.

Arghittu A, Dettori M, Deriu G, Soddu S, Manca P, Carboni A Healthcare (Basel). 2022; 10(5).

PMID: 35627982 PMC: 9141022. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare10050845.

References
1.
Walther-Wenke G, Doerner R, Montag T, Greiss O, Hornei B, Knels R . Bacterial contamination of platelet concentrates prepared by different methods: results of standardized sterility testing in Germany. Vox Sang. 2006; 90(3):177-82. DOI: 10.1111/j.1423-0410.2006.00753.x. View

2.
HOGMAN C, Engstrand L . Serious bacterial complications from blood components--how do they occur?. Transfus Med. 1998; 8(1):1-3. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-3148.1998.00118.x. View

3.
Goldman M, Roy G, Frechette N, Decary F, Massicotte L, Delage G . Evaluation of donor skin disinfection methods. Transfusion. 1997; 37(3):309-12. DOI: 10.1046/j.1537-2995.1997.37397240214.x. View

4.
Lee C, Ho P, Chan N, Mak A, Hong J, Lin C . Impact of donor arm skin disinfection on the bacterial contamination rate of platelet concentrates. Vox Sang. 2002; 83(3):204-8. DOI: 10.1046/j.1423-0410.2002.00219.x. View

5.
Beresford A . Transfusion reaction due to Yersinia enterocolitica and review of other reported cases. Pathology. 1995; 27(2):133-5. DOI: 10.1080/00313029500169732. View