In vitro comparison of epidural bacteria filters permeability and screening scanning electron microscopy

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorSener, Aysin
dc.contributor.authorErkin, Yuksel
dc.contributor.authorSener, Alper
dc.contributor.authorTasdogen, Aydin
dc.contributor.authorDokumaci, Esra
dc.contributor.authorElar, Zahide
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-27T20:52:21Z
dc.date.available2025-01-27T20:52:21Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.departmentÇanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi
dc.description.abstractBackground and objectives: Epidural catheter bacteria filters are barriers in the patient-controlled analgesia/anaesthesia for preventing contamination at the epidural insertion site. The efficiency of these filters varies according to pore sizes and materials. Method: The bacterial adhesion capability of the two filters was measured in vitro experiment. Adhesion capacities for standard Staphylococcus aureus (ATCC 25923) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ATCC 27853) strains of the two different filters (Portex and Rusch) which have the same pore size were examined. Bacterial suspension of 0.5 Mc Farland was placed in the patient-controlled analgesia pump, was filtered at a speed of 5 mL/h. in continuous infusion for 48 h and accumulated in bottle. The two filters were compared with colony counts of bacteria in the filters and bottles. At the same time, the filters and adhered bacteria were monitored by scanning electron microscope. Results: Electron microscopic examination of filters showed that the Portex filter had a granular and the Rusch filter fibrillary structure. Colony counting from the catheter and bottle showed that both of the filters have significant bacterial adhesion capability (p <0.001). After the bacteria suspension infusion, colony countings showed that the Portex filter was more efficient (p <0.001). There was not any difference between S. aureus and P aeruginosa bacteria adhesion. In the SEM monitoring after the infusion, it was physically shown that the bacteria were adhered efficiently by both of the filters. Conclusion: The granular structured filter was found statistically and significantly more successful than the fibrial. Although the pore sizes of the filters were same - of which structural differences shown by SEM were the same - it would not be right to attribute the changes in the efficiencies to only structural differences. Using microbiological and physical proofs with regard to efficiency at the same time has been another important aspect of this experiment. (C) 2013 Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia. Published by Elsevier Editora Ltda. All rights reserved.
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.bjan.2013.08.004
dc.identifier.endpage496
dc.identifier.issn0034-7094
dc.identifier.issn1806-907X
dc.identifier.issue6
dc.identifier.pmid26614147
dc.identifier.startpage491
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjan.2013.08.004
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12428/25741
dc.identifier.volume65
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000367513200011
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isopt
dc.publisherElsevier Science Inc
dc.relation.ispartofRevista Brasileira De Anestesiologia
dc.relation.publicationcategoryinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.snmzKA_WoS_20250125
dc.subjectPostoperative Analgesia
dc.subjectAbscess
dc.subjectComplications
dc.subjectInfection
dc.titleIn vitro comparison of epidural bacteria filters permeability and screening scanning electron microscopy
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu