A Shelf-Life Assessment of Sterilized Surgical Instruments Stored Under Controlled Conditions: A Comparative Study of a Single vs. Double Self-Sealing Pouch
(1) Background: postoperative surgical-site infections are a significant complication in small-animal surgical procedures, with detected rates ranging from 0.8% to 18.1%, depending on the type of surgery. The sterilization process of surgical instruments is a crucial factor in infection control, but...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2025-06-01
|
| Series: | Veterinary Sciences |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2306-7381/12/6/564 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849425862787596288 |
|---|---|
| author | Stefano Cavalli Chiara Caterino Francesca Paola Nocera Francesca Pizzano Rossana Schena Federica Aragosa Sinem Arslan Giovanni Della Valle Luisa De Martino Gerardo Fatone |
| author_facet | Stefano Cavalli Chiara Caterino Francesca Paola Nocera Francesca Pizzano Rossana Schena Federica Aragosa Sinem Arslan Giovanni Della Valle Luisa De Martino Gerardo Fatone |
| author_sort | Stefano Cavalli |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | (1) Background: postoperative surgical-site infections are a significant complication in small-animal surgical procedures, with detected rates ranging from 0.8% to 18.1%, depending on the type of surgery. The sterilization process of surgical instruments is a crucial factor in infection control, but the shelf life of surgical instruments and the best packaging method are not precisely defined due to the multiple variables that influence them. This study aimed to assess the shelf life of surgical instruments stored under controlled environmental conditions in a veterinary hospital and compare two packaging methods: using a self-sealing single pouch versus a self-sealing double pouch. (2) Methods: a sample of 400 non-sterile screws was divided into three groups: Group 1 (175 screws in single pouches), Group 2 (175 screws in double pouches), and Group 3 (50 non-sterile screws as a control group to verify the microbial culture efficiency). Microbiological tests were conducted at 1, 7, 15, 30, 60, 182, and 390 days post-sterilization. (3) Results: no bacterial growth was detected on screws packaged in single and double pouches up to 182 days. However, after 390 days, bacterial growth was observed in one screw packaged in a single pouch. In Group 3, only two screws turned out to be bacteriologically positive. (4) Conclusions: no statistical difference was found between the two groups; however, the detection of a single positive screw in the single-pouch group raised a potential clinical consideration, suggesting the need for further studies based on events and time. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-ccbfee6f3ef74bfd8fd92d77dafe92c3 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2306-7381 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-06-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Veterinary Sciences |
| spelling | doaj-art-ccbfee6f3ef74bfd8fd92d77dafe92c32025-08-20T03:29:38ZengMDPI AGVeterinary Sciences2306-73812025-06-0112656410.3390/vetsci12060564A Shelf-Life Assessment of Sterilized Surgical Instruments Stored Under Controlled Conditions: A Comparative Study of a Single vs. Double Self-Sealing PouchStefano Cavalli0Chiara Caterino1Francesca Paola Nocera2Francesca Pizzano3Rossana Schena4Federica Aragosa5Sinem Arslan6Giovanni Della Valle7Luisa De Martino8Gerardo Fatone9Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Via F. Delpino 1, 80137 Naples, ItalyDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Via F. Delpino 1, 80137 Naples, ItalyDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Via F. Delpino 1, 80137 Naples, ItalyDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Via F. Delpino 1, 80137 Naples, ItalyDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Via F. Delpino 1, 80137 Naples, ItalyDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Via F. Delpino 1, 80137 Naples, ItalyDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Via F. Delpino 1, 80137 Naples, ItalyDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Via F. Delpino 1, 80137 Naples, ItalyDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Via F. Delpino 1, 80137 Naples, ItalyDepartment of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Via F. Delpino 1, 80137 Naples, Italy(1) Background: postoperative surgical-site infections are a significant complication in small-animal surgical procedures, with detected rates ranging from 0.8% to 18.1%, depending on the type of surgery. The sterilization process of surgical instruments is a crucial factor in infection control, but the shelf life of surgical instruments and the best packaging method are not precisely defined due to the multiple variables that influence them. This study aimed to assess the shelf life of surgical instruments stored under controlled environmental conditions in a veterinary hospital and compare two packaging methods: using a self-sealing single pouch versus a self-sealing double pouch. (2) Methods: a sample of 400 non-sterile screws was divided into three groups: Group 1 (175 screws in single pouches), Group 2 (175 screws in double pouches), and Group 3 (50 non-sterile screws as a control group to verify the microbial culture efficiency). Microbiological tests were conducted at 1, 7, 15, 30, 60, 182, and 390 days post-sterilization. (3) Results: no bacterial growth was detected on screws packaged in single and double pouches up to 182 days. However, after 390 days, bacterial growth was observed in one screw packaged in a single pouch. In Group 3, only two screws turned out to be bacteriologically positive. (4) Conclusions: no statistical difference was found between the two groups; however, the detection of a single positive screw in the single-pouch group raised a potential clinical consideration, suggesting the need for further studies based on events and time.https://www.mdpi.com/2306-7381/12/6/564surgical-site infectionssterilization processsterile packaging |
| spellingShingle | Stefano Cavalli Chiara Caterino Francesca Paola Nocera Francesca Pizzano Rossana Schena Federica Aragosa Sinem Arslan Giovanni Della Valle Luisa De Martino Gerardo Fatone A Shelf-Life Assessment of Sterilized Surgical Instruments Stored Under Controlled Conditions: A Comparative Study of a Single vs. Double Self-Sealing Pouch Veterinary Sciences surgical-site infections sterilization process sterile packaging |
| title | A Shelf-Life Assessment of Sterilized Surgical Instruments Stored Under Controlled Conditions: A Comparative Study of a Single vs. Double Self-Sealing Pouch |
| title_full | A Shelf-Life Assessment of Sterilized Surgical Instruments Stored Under Controlled Conditions: A Comparative Study of a Single vs. Double Self-Sealing Pouch |
| title_fullStr | A Shelf-Life Assessment of Sterilized Surgical Instruments Stored Under Controlled Conditions: A Comparative Study of a Single vs. Double Self-Sealing Pouch |
| title_full_unstemmed | A Shelf-Life Assessment of Sterilized Surgical Instruments Stored Under Controlled Conditions: A Comparative Study of a Single vs. Double Self-Sealing Pouch |
| title_short | A Shelf-Life Assessment of Sterilized Surgical Instruments Stored Under Controlled Conditions: A Comparative Study of a Single vs. Double Self-Sealing Pouch |
| title_sort | shelf life assessment of sterilized surgical instruments stored under controlled conditions a comparative study of a single vs double self sealing pouch |
| topic | surgical-site infections sterilization process sterile packaging |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2306-7381/12/6/564 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT stefanocavalli ashelflifeassessmentofsterilizedsurgicalinstrumentsstoredundercontrolledconditionsacomparativestudyofasinglevsdoubleselfsealingpouch AT chiaracaterino ashelflifeassessmentofsterilizedsurgicalinstrumentsstoredundercontrolledconditionsacomparativestudyofasinglevsdoubleselfsealingpouch AT francescapaolanocera ashelflifeassessmentofsterilizedsurgicalinstrumentsstoredundercontrolledconditionsacomparativestudyofasinglevsdoubleselfsealingpouch AT francescapizzano ashelflifeassessmentofsterilizedsurgicalinstrumentsstoredundercontrolledconditionsacomparativestudyofasinglevsdoubleselfsealingpouch AT rossanaschena ashelflifeassessmentofsterilizedsurgicalinstrumentsstoredundercontrolledconditionsacomparativestudyofasinglevsdoubleselfsealingpouch AT federicaaragosa ashelflifeassessmentofsterilizedsurgicalinstrumentsstoredundercontrolledconditionsacomparativestudyofasinglevsdoubleselfsealingpouch AT sinemarslan ashelflifeassessmentofsterilizedsurgicalinstrumentsstoredundercontrolledconditionsacomparativestudyofasinglevsdoubleselfsealingpouch AT giovannidellavalle ashelflifeassessmentofsterilizedsurgicalinstrumentsstoredundercontrolledconditionsacomparativestudyofasinglevsdoubleselfsealingpouch AT luisademartino ashelflifeassessmentofsterilizedsurgicalinstrumentsstoredundercontrolledconditionsacomparativestudyofasinglevsdoubleselfsealingpouch AT gerardofatone ashelflifeassessmentofsterilizedsurgicalinstrumentsstoredundercontrolledconditionsacomparativestudyofasinglevsdoubleselfsealingpouch AT stefanocavalli shelflifeassessmentofsterilizedsurgicalinstrumentsstoredundercontrolledconditionsacomparativestudyofasinglevsdoubleselfsealingpouch AT chiaracaterino shelflifeassessmentofsterilizedsurgicalinstrumentsstoredundercontrolledconditionsacomparativestudyofasinglevsdoubleselfsealingpouch AT francescapaolanocera shelflifeassessmentofsterilizedsurgicalinstrumentsstoredundercontrolledconditionsacomparativestudyofasinglevsdoubleselfsealingpouch AT francescapizzano shelflifeassessmentofsterilizedsurgicalinstrumentsstoredundercontrolledconditionsacomparativestudyofasinglevsdoubleselfsealingpouch AT rossanaschena shelflifeassessmentofsterilizedsurgicalinstrumentsstoredundercontrolledconditionsacomparativestudyofasinglevsdoubleselfsealingpouch AT federicaaragosa shelflifeassessmentofsterilizedsurgicalinstrumentsstoredundercontrolledconditionsacomparativestudyofasinglevsdoubleselfsealingpouch AT sinemarslan shelflifeassessmentofsterilizedsurgicalinstrumentsstoredundercontrolledconditionsacomparativestudyofasinglevsdoubleselfsealingpouch AT giovannidellavalle shelflifeassessmentofsterilizedsurgicalinstrumentsstoredundercontrolledconditionsacomparativestudyofasinglevsdoubleselfsealingpouch AT luisademartino shelflifeassessmentofsterilizedsurgicalinstrumentsstoredundercontrolledconditionsacomparativestudyofasinglevsdoubleselfsealingpouch AT gerardofatone shelflifeassessmentofsterilizedsurgicalinstrumentsstoredundercontrolledconditionsacomparativestudyofasinglevsdoubleselfsealingpouch |