Reusing surgical materials for cataract surgery: an assessment of potential contamination

Aakriti Garg Shukla,David F Chang,Thamizhselvi Dhanaseelan,Vellam Ramakrishnan Vivekanandan,Joseph Gubert,Alan L Robin,Rengaraj Venkatesh
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001509
2024-10-01
Abstract:Purpose: To evaluate microbiological cultures of cataract surgical devices and products that were reused for multiple cases. Setting: Aravind Eye Hospital, Pondicherry, Tamil Nadu, India. Design: Prospective cohort study. Methods: Samples from multiple surgical instruments and products that were reused for consecutive cataract surgeries underwent bacterial and fungal cultures and were monitored alongside positive controls for 7 days. This included instruments that were processed using immediate use steam sterilization (IUSS) between cases (eg, surgical cannulas, syringes, phacoemulsification and coaxial/bimanual irrigation/aspiration [I/A] tips, phacoemulsification and I/A sleeves) (Group 1), instruments that were used without sterilization between cases (eg, phacoemulsification tubing/handpieces, coaxial I/A handpieces) (Group 2), and the residual (unused) fluid from balanced salt solution bags after being used for multiple patients (Group 3). Results: 3333 discrete samples were collected from all 3 product groups that were reused across multiple patients. In all collected samples, no bacterial or fungal growth was observed. Of the 3241 cataract surgeries that used reused and IUSS-sterilized instruments alongside instrument sets cultured on the same day and balanced salt solution bags shared across multiple patients, no eyes developed endophthalmitis over a 6-week follow-up period. Conclusions: Bacterial or fungal growth was not found in extensive microbiological cultures of IUSS-sterilized ophthalmic surgical instruments and cataract surgical products that were reused in multiple patients. This microbiological data complements clinical endophthalmitis data from 2 million consecutive cases at the Aravind Eye Hospital, suggesting that their instrument and surgical supply processing practices may allow for safe and sustainable ophthalmic care.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?