Propofol and the risk of transmission of infection

Trépanier, Claude A.; Lessard, Martin

doi:10.1007/bf03018635

Cited by 14 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although more frequent sampling would be required to plot precise bacterial growth curves, our data demonstrates a lag phase of at least six hours after inoculation into propofol for both organisms studied. This finding is similar to previous work and has formed the basis of recommendations in human hospitals that propofol should be used within six to 12 hours after the vial is first pierced (Trépanier and Lessard 2003, Diprivan™ Data Sheet 2006) after which time exponential growth of contaminant bacteria occurs.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

A comparison of microbial growth in alfaxalone, propofol and thiopental

Mansel

Clutton

2008

J of Small Animal Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

A comparison of microbial growth in alfaxalone, propofol and thiopental

Mansel

Clutton

2008

J of Small Animal Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is noteworthy that no reports of infection associated with propofol usage have occurred where safe injection practices have been followed. 53 Improved compliance is in the best interest of practitioners and patients alike. We, a combined study group from Stellenbosch University and the South African Society of Anaesthesiologists (SASA), invite you to take part in a survey concerning propofol injection practices by anaesthetists.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A survey of propofol injection practices reveals poor knowledge of and unsatisfactory adherence to the SASA Guidelines for Infection Control

Breedt

Coetzee

Kluyts

et al. 2017

Southern African Journal of Anaesthesia and Analgesia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Propofol lipid emulsion supports bacterial growth and various outbreaks of postoperative infection are attributed to extrinsic contamination. This study's objectives were to ascertain propofol administration practices among South African anaesthesiologists and to determine the influence of the 2014 South African Society of Anaesthesiologists (SASA) Guidelines for Infection Control in Anaesthesia. Methods: A total of 1 598 SASA members were invited to participate anonymously and 634 replies were received. Using a riskscoring system developed from 13 questionnaire items, 542 respondents who administer propofol infusions were stratified into Low-, Moderate-, High-and Very High-Risk groups. Results: The majority (65%) of the 542 participants who administer propofol infusions were classified as Moderate Risk, 29% as Low Risk and 6% as High and Very High Risk. Some 61% were aware of the SASA Guidelines, of whom 47.3% had studied them. The median risk-score of the Studied Guidelines group was significantly smaller (p < 0.001). They included a greater proportion who were categorised as low risk (58% vs. 45%) and a lower proportion who were moderate risk (38% vs. 51%). Proportions of high-risk individuals did not differ. Of the total 634 respondents, 247 used rubber-stoppered vials of whom 28% had studied the SASA Guidelines; 20% of the Studied Guidelines group often/always shared vial contents between patients versus 12% of those who had not studied them (p = 0.13). Conversely, 40% (studied group) versus 13.6% (not-studied group) often/always wiped the diaphragm and seldom/never shared vial contents between patients (p < 0.0001). In all, 25% of the total 634 respondents often/ always pre-prepared multiple propofol syringes; 5.0% diluted propofol and often/always pre-prepared syringes. Conclusion: Penetration of the SASA Guidelines was low. Differences in unsafe practices among anaesthesiologists who had read the guidelines were statistically significant but clinically inconsequential. This highlights a need for greater publicity, emphasising their practical importance.

show abstract

“…There are many reports on the isolation of various fungi and bacteria from propofol (Bennett et al 1995) (Trépanier & Lessard 2003). Postanaesthetic morbidity or mortality, after administration of contaminated propofol or associated with preservatives, have been reported (Langevin 1999).…”

Section: Waste Anaesthetic Gas Concentrations Of Volatile Agents In Amentioning

confidence: 99%

Abstracts Presented at the Association of Veterinary Anaesthetists Spring Meeting, Paris, France, 7–10 March 2007

Duncan¹

2007

Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Propofol and the risk of transmission of infection

Cited by 14 publications

References 15 publications

A comparison of microbial growth in alfaxalone, propofol and thiopental

A comparison of microbial growth in alfaxalone, propofol and thiopental

A survey of propofol injection practices reveals poor knowledge of and unsatisfactory adherence to the SASA Guidelines for Infection Control

Abstracts Presented at the Association of Veterinary Anaesthetists Spring Meeting, Paris, France, 7–10 March 2007

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About