↓ Skip to main content

Comparing the speed of irrigation between pulsatile lavage versus gravity irrigation: an Ex-vivo experimental investigation

Overview of attention for article published in Patient Safety in Surgery, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparing the speed of irrigation between pulsatile lavage versus gravity irrigation: an Ex-vivo experimental investigation
Published in
Patient Safety in Surgery, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13037-017-0124-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lily R. Mundy, Mark J. Gage, Richard S. Yoon, Frank A. Liporace

Abstract

The need for reoperation or wound infection treatments between pulsatile and gravity irrigation are statistically equivalent, however, it is unclear which method maximizes operative efficiency and expeditious irrigation. In this study we set out to determine the differences in irrigation rate between these various treatment methods. This was an ex-vivo experimental laboratory study not involving human subjects. Irrigation rates were tested based on the time in seconds required to empty a three-liter bag of normal saline hanging at either 6 or 9 ft. Three forms of irrigation were tested: gravity irrigation (GI6, GI9), low-pressure pulsatile irrigation (LP6, LP9) and high-pressure pulsatile irrigation. One-way ANOVA and Student's t-test were used to compare rates based on height and form of irrigation. Significant differences in irrigation rates were noted at 6 ft between all three forms of irrigation with gravity irrigation the fastest followed by high-pressure and low-pressure pulsatile irrigation (GI6, mean 142 s ± 3.2; HP6, mean 189 s ± 10.2; LP6, mean 323 s ± 22.5; p < 0.001). This difference was also found at 9 ft (GI9, mean 114 s ± 1.5; HP9, mean 186 s ± 10.5; LP9, mean 347 s ± 3.5; p < 0.001). Gravity irrigation was significantly faster (p < 0.001) at an increased height, whereas the high and low-pressure irrigation rates were unaffected by height. List price comparison found pulsatile irrigation to cost approximately 3.3 times more than gravity lavage. Gravity irrigation provided the most rapid rate of irrigation tested, regardless of the height. With existing literature demonstrating equivalent clinical outcomes between methods, gravity lavage offers a faster and potentially more cost-effective form of irrigation.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 25%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 10%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Professor 1 5%
Other 4 20%
Unknown 5 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Unknown 8 40%