MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404589119 · doi:10.1227/neu.0000000000003289

So the Bone Flap Hit the Floor, Now What? An In Vitro Comparison of Cadaveric Bone Flap Decontamination Procedures

2024· article· en· W4404589119 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexis Marion, Simon Lévesque, Charles Touchette, Béatrice Huppé-Gignac, Philippe Martin, Christine Arsenault, Christian Iorio‐Morin

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurosurgery · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfection Control in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersFaculté de médecine et des sciences de la santé, Université de SherbrookeFaculty of Medicine and Health, University of SydneyFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsMedicineHuman decontaminationSurgeryDebridement (dental)ChlorhexidineSterilization (economics)Cadaveric spasmSalineDentistryAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Over the course of their career, 66% of neurosurgeons will witness someone accidentally dropping a bone flap on the floor during a craniotomy procedure. Although this event is rare, it can have significant consequences for the patient, and little literature is available to guide management of this complication. Our objective was to compare 5 bone flap decontamination protocols for efficacy in reducing bacterial load, with the goal of safely reimplanting the dropped flap. METHODS: Cadaveric human bone flaps were contaminated with common operating room (OR) contaminant bacteria. The bone flaps were then subject to 1 of 5 decontamination protocols: washing in saline, mechanical debridement, washing in antibiotics, washing in alcoholic chlorhexidine antiseptic, and flash decontamination in autoclave. Inoculum from the flaps was then used to grow bacteria in petri dishes, and bacterial load after decontamination was assessed. Some flaps were physically dropped on an OR floor to simulate and evaluate a real-life contamination. RESULTS: The observed contamination from a flap dropped on an OR floor can be significant (up to 1070 colony-forming units cultured per flap). All protocols tested decreased bacterial load of the bone flaps to different degrees: saline by 95.7%, mechanical debridement by 97.5%, antibiotic bath by 99.5%, alcoholic chlorhexidine by 99.9%, and flash sterilization by 100.0%. Flash sterilization led to significant alterations in the flap's physical appearance. CONCLUSION: In the event of the accidental fall of a bone flap, decontamination by rinsing in an alcohol-chlorhexidine solution followed by 3 successive washes in saline seemed to provide the best balance between effectiveness, safety, and complexity of the method.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.581
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.300 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurosurgerySame topicInfection Control in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207