Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Does Prebiopsy, Nonsterile Ultrasonography Gel Affect Biopsy-Site Asepsis?

  • Clinical Investigation
  • Published:
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which the use of nonsterile gel, prior to antiseptic procedures in ultrasonography (US)-guided percutaneous biopsies, results in contamination of the biopsy site.

Materials and Methods

Patients referred for US-guided percutaneous biopsies were included in this study. Transmission material used for US evaluation before biopsy-site antiseptic procedures were performed was either nonsterile gel or sterile saline. Patients were randomly assigned to two groups: nonsterile gel (n = 30) and sterile saline (n = 30). Before the transmission material was used and after antiseptic procedures were performed, microbial swabs of a 10-cm2-diameter area were obtained at the biopsy site. Swabs were also obtained from the gel, saline, and povidine-iodine. Inoculated specimen plates were incubated at 37°C under aerobic conditions, and the numbers of colony-forming units recorded. Nominal logistic regression analysis was used to calculate the odds of postantisepsis bacterial growth (after antiseptic procedures were performed) based on group, gender, coincidental disease (diabetes, chronic renal failure, and malignancy), biopsy-site location (head and neck or breast and abdomen), and local factors (skin fold, skin tag, and hair).

Results

The following odds ratios (adjusted for the other variables) and their 95% confidence intervals were calculated: (1) group (2.9 [0.8–11.1]; p = 0.10); (2) gender (1.2 [0.3–5.2]; p = 0.78); (3) coincidental disease (7.6 [0.9–166.7]; p = 0.09); (4) biopsy site location (6.2 [1.4–31.3]; p = 0.02); and (5) local factors (7.0 [1.6–36.0]; p = 0.01). No bacterial growth occurred with swabs obtained from gel, povidine-iodine, or saline.

Conclusion

We conclude that nonsterile gel used prior to percutaneous biopsy does not affect biopsy-site asepsis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hutchinson J, Runge W, Mulvey M, et al. (2004) Burkholderia cepacia infections associated with intrinsically contaminated ultrasound gel: the role of microbial degradation of parabens. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 25(4):291–296

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Spencer P, Spencer RC (1988) Ultrasound scanning of post-operative wounds—the risks of cross-infection. Clin Radiol 39(3):245–246

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Muradali D, Gold WL, Phillips A, Wilson S (1995) Can ultrasound probes and coupling gel be a source of nosocomial infection in patients undergoing sonography? An in vivo and in vitro study. AJR 164(6):1521–1524

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Fowler C, McCracken D (1999) US probes: risk of cross infection and ways to reduce it-comparison of cleaning methods. Radiology 213(1):299–300

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Karadeniz YM, Kilic D, Kara Altan S, Altinok D, Guney S (2001) Evaluation of the role of ultrasound machines as a source of nosocomial and cross-infection. Invest Radiol 36(9):554–558

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gaillot O, Maruejouls C, Abachin E, et al. Nosocomial outbreak of Klebsiella pneumoniae producing SHV-5 extended-spectrum beta-lactamase, originating from a contaminated ultrasonography coupling gel. J Clin Microbiol 36(5):1357–1360

  7. Weist K, Wendt C, Petersen LR, Versmold H, Ruden H (2000) An outbreak of pyodermas among neonates caused by ultrasound gel contaminated with methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 21(12):761–764

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Health Canada (2004) Notice to hospitals: important safety information on ultrasound and medical gels. Available at: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/alt_formats/hpfb-dgpsa/pdf/medeff/ultrasound_nth-ah_e.pdf; accessed April 4, 2005

  9. Arata T, Kamitani M, Miyai T, Ito M (1997) Antiseptic effects at injection sites. Dermatology 195(Suppl 2):107–110

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Abant Izzet Baysal University, Izzet Baysal School of Medicine, 14280, Golkoy/Bolu, Turkey

    Kamil Gurel & Safiye Gurel

  2. Department of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Abant Izzet Baysal University, Izzet Baysal School of Medicine, 14280, Golkoy/Bolu, Turkey

    Oguz Karabay

  3. Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA

    Charles Hildebolt

Authors
  1. Kamil Gurel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Oguz Karabay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Safiye Gurel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Charles Hildebolt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kamil Gurel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gurel, K., Karabay, O., Gurel, S. et al. Does Prebiopsy, Nonsterile Ultrasonography Gel Affect Biopsy-Site Asepsis?. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 31, 131–134 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-007-9091-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-007-9091-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation