PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10695749

Hepatitis: risks for the surgeon.

Abstract

Six different hepatitis viruses have now been characterized. Hepatitis B and C are the two hepatitis infections that are of greatest concern for surgeons. Hepatitis B and C share several features that have led to this concern. Both are blood-borne infections. Both are associated with chronic infection ultimately leading to cirrhosis, portal hypertension, and hepatocellular carcinoma, and both can be occupational infections for the surgeon after percutaneous injury associated with infected blood. Chronic hepatitis B infection is seen in 1.25 million people in the U.S. It is associated with a transmission rate to healthcare workers of 25 to 30 per cent following a hollow needle stick injury. Five per cent of acute infections result in chronic disease. It can be effectively prevented as an occupational infection by vaccination with the highly effective hepatitis B vaccine. Chronic hepatitis C infection is present in nearly 4 million people in the U.S. It has a lower rate of transmission than hepatitis B following needle stick injury, but it has a 50 to 80 per cent rate of chronic disease after acute infections. There is no vaccine for hepatitis C, and only prevention of blood exposure will avoid the risks of this occupational infection. Other hepatitis viruses are likely to be identified. Prevention of blood exposure, by the better use of barriers in the operating room and modification of surgical techniques, is recommended to prevent occupational infection from both known and unknown blood-borne viruses from the surgical patient.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

D E Fry. 2000. Hepatitis: risks for the surgeon.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10695749/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Glove leakage rates as a function of latex content and brand: caveat emptor.

HYPOTHESIS: That water leakage rates and protection against blood-borne pathogens should not vary as a function of latex content among Food and Drug Administration-approved gloves, allowing avoidance of unnecessary latex exposure. DESIGN AND METHODS: Eighteen different glove types were purchased and tested using the American Society for Testing Methods Standard Test for Detecting Holes in medical gloves, which involves mounting the glove on a plastic tube, pouring a liter of tap water into the glove, and visually inspecting the glove initially and after 2 minutes. Half of the gloves were tested straight from the package and half after a standardized manipulation. SETTING: A university hospital. RESULTS: Eleven sterile glove types (5 high latex content, 4 low latex content, and 2 nonlatex content), and 7 nonsterile examination glove types (2 high latex content, 2 low latex content, and 3 nonlatex content) were tested (total tested, 3720 gloves). Leakage rates were greater for examination than for surgical gloves (relative risk [RR], 1.41, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.96), for manipulated than for unused gloves (RR, 2.89, 5% CI, 1.98-4.22), and for low latex content surgical gloves (RR, 2.58, 95% CI, 1.35-4.92) or nonlatex content surgical gloves (RR, 4.93, 95% CI, 2.35-10.32) than for high latex content surgical gloves. Significant differences were observed among low latex content surgical gloves (P</=.001) and all types of examination gloves (P =.0015) especially after the standardized manipulation (leakage rates ranging from 0%-30%). CONCLUSIONS: Food and Drug Administration approval should not be interpreted as suggesting equality of different manufacturers' products. Some low latex and nonlatex content gloves are very resistant to leakage and should provide an effective barrier for preventing exposure to blood-borne pathogens, while others may not.

Blood-Borne Pathogens↗