Surgical Glove Perforation in Cardiac Surgery∗

Abstract

The number of punctures that occur during cardiac operations is obviously higher than has so far been assumed. Therefore, cardiac surgeons should consider the incidence of unknown glove perforations when planning surgery in patients with infectious diseases.

Occult Glove Perforation During Adult Elective Orthopaedic Surgery

“…In Gynaecology and obstetrics procedures it varies from 24.4% to 20.8% [13], general surgery 45 %, plastic surgery 21.4% and thoracic surgery 26% (14,15) . In orthopaedic surgery with use of metallic instruments, oscillating saw, sharp implants and wires may be responsible for higher risk of glove perforation [6] .…”

Risk of surgical glove perforation in oral and maxillofacial surgery

“…Among surgical staff, the principal surgeon was more prone to glove perforation than his or her assistants. 15, 16 Driever et al 15 analysed 953 gloves used in cardiac surgery and observed punctures in 26.0% of the gloves used by surgeons, 22.3% of those used by first assistants and 9.2% of those used by second assistants. In this study, surgeons in orthognathic surgery demonstrated approximately the same rate of glove perforation as first assistants, while second assistants had a lower rate.…”

Glove Perforation in Outpatient Dermatologic Surgery

“…Injuries can also occur during mounting or repositioning the needle in the needle holder. The use of “no‐touch” techniques is associated with lower injury rates 13 …”

“…In abdominal surgical operations, operators sustained glove perforations in 35% to 54%, in thoracic surgery 26%, in otolaryngology/head and neck surgery 4.8% to 28.5%, and in gynecologic procedures 10.1% to 43% of the gloves examined. [11][12][13][14][15][16] To our knowledge, this is the first report relating to the incidence of surgical glove perforations in outpatient dermatologic surgery. The risk of glove perforation was found to be relatively small: 3.0%.…”

“…The use of ''notouch'' techniques is associated with lower injury rates. 13 The number of recognized glove perforations has rarely been considered in the literature. 6 As the present investigation shows, only 5 of 20 perforations (25%) were noticed by the wearer.…”