Perspectives of using of “aseptic” drains for abdominal drainage

Abstract

AIM: Aim of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of using different types of drain tubes to prevent and reduce the drain-associated infection rate of abdominal drainage procedures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: 80 cases of used so called “standard”, “coladerm” and “chlorhexidine” drain tubes for abdominal drainage were analysed. “Standard” drain tubes were used 35 times and “coladerm” and “chlorhexidine” tubes – 20 and 25 times respectively. There were adopted in different elective and emergency so called “clean”, ”potentially contaminated” and “contaminated” abdominal surgical procedures. The drain tubes were removed between 2 to 14 days after the operations followed by the bacteriological study in search of bacteria growth on the surface of drainage tubes were examined.

RESULTS: Of all 35 cases of used “standard” drain tubes the bacterial growth was found in 23 cases, that means 65,7%; of 20 cases of drains covered by “coladerm” polymer the bacterial growth was found in 6 cases (30%) and only in 3 cases of 25 cases of drain tubes covered by polymer and “chlorhexidine” were positive, that means 12%. The most interesting data were obtained considering the so called “clean” and “contaminated” operations. After the so called “clean” operations the bacterial growth using “standard” drain tubes was found almost in 50% of cases and in 8,3% of cases using “chlorhexidine” drain tubes. After the “potentially contaminated” and “contaminated” operations the bacterial growth was found in 68,2% using “standard” tubes, and using “coladerm” and “chlorhexidine” drain tubes – in 50% and 16,7% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS: In our limited experience using of new antimicrobial polymeric composites as coatings mean the adhesion of bacteria and formation of biofilm at drainage tubes is prevented, which can significantly reduce the drain-associated infection rate.