Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England logoLink to Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England
. 1992 Jan;74(1):26–28.

Contamination of underwater seal drainage systems in thoracic surgery.

P Hornick 1, L C John 1, J Wallis 1, V Wilkins 1, G M Rees 1, S J Edmondson 1
PMCID: PMC2497485  PMID: 1736790

Abstract

The incidence of bacteriological contamination of drainage fluid (water constituting the underwater seal plus drainage effluent) was studied in 38 patients (50 chest drains), up to 6 days after thoracotomy. No bacteriological contamination was demonstrated in any of the samples taken during this period of time. We conclude that the underwater seal drainage system may be left for up to 6 days postoperatively without change of any of its components and without risk of contamination.

Full text

PDF
26

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Britton B. J., Gilmore O. J., Lumley J. S., Castleden W. M. A comparison between disposable and non-disposable suction drainage units: a report of a controlled trial. Br J Surg. 1979 Apr;66(4):279–280. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800660420. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Casey B. H. Bacterial spread in polyethylene tubing. A possible source of surgical wound contamination. Med J Aust. 1971 Oct 2;2(14):718–719. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.1971.tb92504.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Cerise E. J., Pierce W. A., Diamond D. L. Abdominal drains: their role as a source of infection following splenectomy. Ann Surg. 1970 May;171(5):764–769. doi: 10.1097/00000658-197005000-00016. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Lumley J. S., Britton B. J., Chattopadhyay B. The physical and bacteriological properties of disposable and non-disposable suction drainage units in the laboratory. Br J Surg. 1974 Oct;61(10):832–837. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800611020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Magee C., Rodeheaver G. T., Golden G. T., Fox J., Edgerton M. T., Edlich R. F. Potentiation of wound infection by surgical drains. Am J Surg. 1976 May;131(5):547–549. doi: 10.1016/0002-9610(76)90007-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Nora P. F., Vanecko R. M., Bransfield J. J. Prophylactic abdominal drains. Arch Surg. 1972 Aug;105(2):173–176. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.1972.04180080027005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Watson J. D., Smith G., Forrest H., Quin R. O. Contamination of suction drainage systems in vascular surgery. J R Coll Surg Edinb. 1988 Jun;33(3):130–131. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Willett K. M., Simmons C. D., Bentley G. The effect of suction drains after total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1988 Aug;70(4):607–610. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.70B4.3403607. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England are provided here courtesy of The Royal College of Surgeons of England

RESOURCES