Asepsis

Asepsis for Cesarean Section in Dogs

Asepsis

X min read

Owners

Learn essential asepsis techniques for cesarean sections in dogs to ensure safe surgery and reduce infection risks.

Sustainable Vet Group

Updated on

July 17, 2026

This article is for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for professional veterinary advice. Every case is unique, so always consult your veterinarian for guidance specific to your pet.

This content is intended for veterinary professionals for educational purposes. It does not replace clinical judgment or tailored advice. Always rely on your training, expertise, and the specific context of your patients.

Cesarean section in dogs is performed under time pressure that does not apply to elective surgery. Puppy survival depends directly on minimizing the interval between induction and delivery. Every minute of anesthesia exposure reduces neonatal viability.

This time constraint does not eliminate asepsis requirements. It modifies how they are sequenced and distributed across the team.

What this covers: The C-section-specific asepsis protocol for dogs, including the dirty scrub/final sterile prep sequence, the surgeon pre-scrub-before-induction protocol, team role distribution, and how time pressure modifies without eliminating standard asepsis requirements.Evidence base: University of Illinois Veterinary Medicine anesthesia for caesarean section guidelines; Clinician's Brief canine cesarean section step-by-step guide; Clinician's Brief anesthesia and surgical approach recommendations.Core principle: The standard asepsis protocol for abdominal soft tissue surgery applies to C-section in all its components. What changes is the sequencing and team distribution of those components to minimize anesthesia-to-delivery time without compromising the sterile field at incision.

Key takeaways

Anesthesia time must be minimized; team preparation before induction is essential.
Two-phase skin prep is standard: dirty scrub in prep area, final sterile prep in OR after induction.
Surgeon must be scrubbed and gowned before patient induction so incision begins immediately.
Instrument table and drapes should be set up before patient enters the OR.
A dedicated neonatal resuscitation team must be assembled before surgery begins.
Standard abdominal asepsis applies: sterile instruments, gown, gloves, drapes.
Fluoroquinolones are contraindicated for antimicrobial prophylaxis; use cephalosporins.

Why C-section asepsis differs from elective abdominal surgery

The time-pressure constraint

In elective soft tissue surgery, the patient is anesthetized, positioned, and then prepared. The prep phase takes as long as it needs to.

In canine C-section, neonatal exposure to anesthetic agents begins at induction. The opioids, alpha-2 agonists, and inhalant agents used for anesthesia cross the placenta and cause:

Neonatal bradycardia and apnea
Reduced APGAR scores
Decreased neonatal viability with increasing exposure duration

University of Illinois Veterinary Medicine guidelines state: "The time the dam is under anesthesia should be minimized... With practice and coordination, an experienced team can often have all puppies removed within 5 to 10 minutes of induction."

This means the standard sequential preparation sequence, anesthesia then prep then draping then surgery, must be restructured.

What does not change

Sterile instruments are required
Sterile gown and gloves are required
Sterile draping is required
Skin antisepsis is required
Aseptic wound closure is required

What changes is when and by whom each step is performed, not whether it is performed.

Anesthesia protocol and its asepsis implications

No premedication with standard opioids or sedatives

Standard premedication agents (opioids, alpha-2 agonists) cross the placenta and depress neonatal respiration and cardiac output. The canine C-section protocol typically uses:

No premedication (or minimal premedication with agents of low placental transfer)
IV catheter placed without premedication
Induction with propofol or alfaxalone
Maintenance with isoflurane in oxygen

Asepsis implication: IV catheter placement without premedication requires brief chemical or physical restraint. Aseptic catheter site preparation (clip, 0.5 to 2% CHG scrub) must be performed efficiently without compromising technique.

Induction in the OR

University of Illinois guidelines specify: "Induction should be performed in the operating room (OR)." This is a deliberate modification from standard workflow where patients are often induced in a prep area.

Inducing in the OR means:

The final sterile skin prep happens in the OR on the already-induced patient
The surgeon must be scrubbed and gowned before induction
The instrument table must be set up and the drapes pre-cut before the patient arrives

For standard soft tissue asepsis from which C-section protocol derives, including the full abdominal soft tissue asepsis framework and wound classification that applies as the baseline for C-section, that guide covers the canine soft tissue asepsis standard.

The five-domain surgical asepsis framework that governs all small animal surgery applies to C-section in full; time pressure modifies the sequencing but not the standard. For surgical asepsis standards underlying C-section protocol, including how the instrument sterilization, skin antisepsis, sterile technique, OR environment, and team preparation domains all apply to C-section, that guide covers the comprehensive surgical asepsis standard.

The two-phase skin preparation protocol

Phase 1: Dirty scrub (prep area)

The initial skin preparation is performed in the prep area while the dam is being pre-oxygenated and the IV catheter is being placed:

Clip the ventral midline from mid-sternum to pubis (and lumbosacral space if spinal anesthesia is planned)
Perform a "dirty scrub": initial antiseptic application to remove gross contamination, hair debris, and surface bacteria
This is not the final sterile prep; it is the contamination reduction step before the patient moves to the OR

The dirty scrub ensures that when the final sterile prep is performed in the OR, the skin surface is already cleaned of gross debris, allowing the antiseptic to work more effectively in the limited time available.

Phase 2: Final sterile preparation (OR)

After induction in the OR, while the surgeon is already scrubbed and gowned:

A non-sterile team member applies the final antiseptic preparation using standard centrifugal technique
Clinician's Brief recommends "a fast-acting, paint-on surgical preparation solution" to reduce prep time without compromising antiseptic contact
The prep must still observe contact time requirements; the choice of fast-acting combined agent (CHG-alcohol) supports this within the shortened timeline
Drapes are applied immediately after prep is complete

The Clinician's Brief C-section guide specifies: "The surgeon should be scrubbed and gowned prior to induction so the procedure can begin immediately following final sterile preparation of the abdomen."

Team role distribution

Successful C-section asepsis under time pressure requires explicit pre-assignment of every role before the patient enters the prep area:

Role	Responsible team member	Timing
IV catheter placement	Tech 1	Before induction; in prep area
Pre-oxygenation	Tech 1 or 2	Before induction; concurrent with catheter
Dirty scrub	Tech 2	Prep area; before transport to OR
Anesthesia induction	Anesthetist	In OR; after surgeon scrubbed
Final sterile prep	Non-sterile tech	In OR; immediately after induction
Draping	Sterile scrub tech or surgeon	Immediately after final prep
Surgery	Surgeon (pre-scrubbed and gowned)	Immediately after draping
Neonatal resuscitation	Dedicated team (minimum 1 per puppy)	Receiving room; ready before incision

No team member should be assigned multiple roles that cannot be performed simultaneously. The most common source of time delay in canine C-section is undefined or overlapping role assignments that produce waiting periods between preparation steps.

Intraoperative asepsis

Standard abdominal asepsis applies

Once the sterile field is established, standard abdominal surgical asepsis governs the procedure:

Sterile instruments only on the sterile field
Non-sterile personnel do not contact sterile surfaces
Any contamination event triggers standard break response

Uterine exteriorization and neonatal handoff

The uterus is exteriorized before incision, and puppies are removed through the uterine and abdominal incisions. As each neonate is removed:

The neonatal handler receives the puppy in a clean or sterile towel
The neonatal team works in a designated area outside the sterile field
Amniotic fluid and tissue debris from the uterus must not contaminate the sterile field during delivery

Glove change after uterine closure:

After uterine closure and before abdominal closure, a glove change (and instrument change where possible) reduces contamination of the abdominal closure from uterine contents. Some surgical protocols also include abdominal lavage with warm sterile saline before closure.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis

A one-time preoperative cephalosporin (cefazolin IV, 22 mg/kg, within 60 minutes of incision) is appropriate for canine C-section.

Clinician's Brief notes: "Fluoroquinolones should never be used because of their negative effects on neonatal development and growth."

Antibiotic timing must account for the compressed preparation: cefazolin should be administered at the same time as or immediately before induction, so that therapeutic tissue concentrations are present at incision.

For aseptic technique governing the intraoperative phase, including the sterile field maintenance rules, instrument handling, and break response protocol that apply during the C-section procedure itself, that guide covers the intraoperative technique framework.

Post-operative asepsis

After puppy delivery:

Standard abdominal closure technique applies
E-collar or recovery suit to prevent dam licking the incision during recovery
Neonates should not have access to the dam's incision during nursing (the dam may lick the incision while nursing if the collar is removed)

Wound monitoring after C-section follows standard soft tissue protocols. Incision healing should be confirmed at a 10 to 14 day recheck.

For skin antisepsis preparation applied before C-section, including the centrifugal scrub technique, agent selection, and contact time requirements that inform both the dirty scrub and final sterile prep components of the C-section protocol, that guide covers the skin antisepsis detail.

Frequently asked questions

Can the C-section be performed under local/regional anesthesia rather than general?

Epidural or spinal anesthesia can be used for elective C-section in dogs and avoids placental transfer of general anesthetic agents entirely. However, it requires patient cooperation, is technically more challenging, and is not feasible in an emergency presentation where the dam is in distress. General anesthesia with the protocol modifications described here remains the most commonly used approach in veterinary practice.

Does the surgical prep need to include the lumbosacral space?

Only if epidural or spinal anesthesia is planned. If general anesthesia is used without a regional block, the prep is limited to the ventral midline abdomen. If a lumbosacral epidural or spinal is planned, that site also requires clipping and antiseptic prep before positioning.

How should the neonatal resuscitation area be prepared for asepsis purposes?

The neonatal resuscitation area should be clean, warm (heated surface or warm towels), and have clean instruments for cord clamping and cutting if needed. It is not a sterile field, but it must be clean: surfaces should be disinfected before use, and the personnel receiving neonates should use clean gloves and clean towels to receive each puppy.

C-section asepsis is standard abdominal asepsis performed under time pressure. The components do not change; the sequence and team distribution do. Getting the preparation right before induction, getting the surgeon scrubbed and gowned before the patient arrives in the OR, and having every team member's role assigned in advance are what allow the sterile field to be established in seconds rather than minutes, giving the puppies the best possible start.

Resources

The following sources were used as reference and background for this article:

University of Illinois Veterinary Medicine. Anesthesia for Caesarean Section in Dogs. vetmed.illinois.edu
Clinician's Brief. Cesarean Section in Dogs: Step-by-Step Veterinary Guide. cliniciansbrief.com
Clinician's Brief. How to Perform Cesarean Sections in Dogs. cliniciansbrief.com

Get a Free Poster

Enhance your workspace with a high-quality radiographs reference poster, designed for veterinary professionals. This free physical poster will be shipped directly to you—just fill out the form to request your copy.

Request

Table of contents

Heading 2

Heading 3

Things to know

Asepsis in Orthopedic Implant Surgery

Orthopedic implant surgery operates under a higher asepsis standard than any other category of veterinary surgical procedure. The reason is simple: a contaminated soft tissue wound can be debrided and treated. A contaminated implant usually cannot.

Once bacteria establish biofilm on a metal implant surface, systemic antibiotics cannot reliably penetrate it. Implant removal is frequently the only option for resolving established implant-associated infection.

What this covers: The specific asepsis requirements for orthopedic implant procedures in dogs and cats, why implants elevate SSI risk, the role of biofilm, MRSP considerations, and the components of an enhanced implant surgery asepsis protocol.Evidence base: TPLO SSI retrospective study (769 procedures; PMC10133455); DVM360 TPLO protocol improvement study; Veterinary Practice News MRSP and implant infection data; TPLO SSI rate review (PMC11946642).Key clinical fact: Bacteria commonly involved in veterinary SSI, particularly Staphylococcus species including MRSP, form biofilms on implant surfaces that prevent host immune response and antibiotic penetration. This makes prevention through asepsis more important than treatment after infection occurs.

Key takeaways

Implant surface provides bacteria a substrate for biofilm, bypassing host immunity.
MRSP-colonized dogs have a significantly elevated SSI risk for implant procedures.
TPLO SSI rates of 7 to 28% have been reported; stricter asepsis reduces this substantially.
Implant-associated infection usually requires implant removal for resolution.
Double gloving is recommended for all implant procedures.
OR traffic restriction is more critical for implant procedures than routine soft tissue surgery.
Intraoperative lavage before closure addresses contamination accumulated during the procedure.

Why implants change the asepsis standard

The implant-associated infection mechanism

All surgical procedures carry SSI risk. Implant procedures carry additional risk because the implant itself creates a favorable environment for bacterial colonization.

How this works:

During surgery, bacteria are introduced into the wound through any asepsis lapse
Bacteria adhere to the implant surface (metal plates, screws, pins) within minutes to hours
They begin producing a polysaccharide extracellular matrix: biofilm
Within the biofilm, bacteria are physically protected from host neutrophils and macrophages
Antibiotic molecules cannot penetrate the biofilm at clinically achievable concentrations
The infection persists indefinitely unless the implant is removed

The minimum infective dose (number of bacteria required to establish infection) is dramatically lower in the presence of an implant than in soft tissue alone. This is why contamination events that might be manageable in soft tissue surgery can produce catastrophic outcomes in implant procedures.

Reported SSI rates for veterinary implant procedures

The highest-volume implant procedure in veterinary small animal surgery is the tibial plateau leveling osteotomy (TPLO) for cranial cruciate ligament repair.

Published SSI rates for TPLO:

Overall SSI rate 0.8 to 14.3% in most cohort studies (PMC11946642)
Some reports document rates of 19 to 28% including all complications (DVM360)
The Finnish MRSP outbreak further elevated institutional SSI rates during that period

A retrospective study of 769 TPLO procedures (PMC10133455) confirmed that MDR bacteria isolation correlated with development of major infections requiring additional surgical treatment.

A DVM360 report documented that a specialty referral hospital reduced TPLO implant-associated infection rates by implementing a stricter asepsis protocol, demonstrating directly that asepsis changes outcomes.

The enhanced asepsis protocol for implant surgery

Standard surgical asepsis applies to all procedures. Implant surgery requires every component of that standard plus specific enhancements.

Pre-operative preparation enhancements

Surgical site preparation:

Immediate pre-operative clipping only (no night-before clipping)
Generous clip margins beyond anticipated incision
Minimum three-pass antiseptic scrub sequence
CHG-alcohol or PVI-alcohol combination for optimal immediate plus residual activity
Full contact time observed; site fully dry before draping

Pre-operative MRSP risk assessment:

For high-risk patients (prior MRSP colonization, recent antimicrobial treatment, prior SSI, chronic skin disease), pre-operative screening and decolonization protocols should be considered. MRSP carrier status is a documented significant risk factor for SSI in orthopedic procedures.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis timing:

Cefazolin administered within 60 minutes of incision. Redosing every 90 to 120 minutes for procedures exceeding that interval. Discontinuation within 24 hours post-operatively per current stewardship guidance.

Note: Standard prophylaxis does not cover MRSP. Asepsis is the primary prevention for MRSP.

For MRSP prevention through proper asepsis, including why standard antibiotic prophylaxis does not reliably prevent MRSP SSI and what asepsis-based prevention looks like, that guide covers MRSP-specific prevention in detail.

Orthopedic surgery in dogs without implants still requires rigorous asepsis, but the specific enhancements that implant presence demands build on that foundation. For orthopedic surgery asepsis without implants, including the full perioperative asepsis protocol for canine orthopedic procedures across both implant and non-implant categories, that guide covers the broader orthopedic asepsis context.

Intraoperative enhancements

Double gloving:

Strongly recommended for all implant procedures. The inner glove provides a second barrier if the outer is perforated during bone work, wire handling, or saw use. Outer glove perforation during orthopedic procedures is common and frequently undetected without double gloving.

OR traffic restriction:

Implant procedures should have the most restrictive OR traffic policy of any procedure type. Each person in the OR contributes to airborne contamination load. Each door opening disrupts positive pressure. For implant procedures lasting several hours, cumulative contamination risk is significant.

Specific traffic standards:

Only essential personnel present
OR door remains closed throughout the procedure
All required supplies confirmed in the OR before first incision
No personnel re-entry during the procedure unless clinically essential

Implant handling:

Implants remain in sterile packaging until immediate use
Implants are transferred to the sterile field using sterile technique
No implant contacts any non-sterile surface after removal from packaging
If an implant is inadvertently contaminated, it is replaced; contaminated implants are never "cleaned" and returned to the field

Intraoperative lavage:

Surgical wound lavage before closure is standard for implant procedures. Copious sterile saline lavage removes loose debris, blood clots, and free bacteria that accumulated during the procedure.

For implant procedures specifically, antiseptic lavage before closure has been used to reduce residual bacterial contamination including biofilm-forming organisms. Non-antibiotic antiseptic lavage options, such as Simini Protect Lavage, reduce bacteria, biofilms, and resistant organisms at the wound before suturing. This is an intraoperative contamination control step that does not rely on systemic antibiotics and aligns with stewardship principles.

Post-operative considerations

E-collar or recovery suit: Essential. Licking the incision introduces oral bacteria including Staphylococcus species directly onto a wound with an underlying implant.

Activity restriction: Extended (typically 8 to 12 weeks for bone healing procedures). Physical activity stress can disrupt healing and may contribute to implant failure.

Wound monitoring protocol: More frequent assessment than for routine soft tissue surgery. Early SSI detection is critical because treatment options narrow rapidly once biofilm becomes established.

For TPLO-specific asepsis protocols, including the application of enhanced implant asepsis to the most common veterinary orthopedic implant procedure, that guide covers TPLO asepsis in procedural detail.

Environmental asepsis for implant procedures

The OR environment standard for implant procedures should meet or exceed the standard for general surgical procedures.

Specific environmental considerations:

Dedicated orthopedic surgical suite where available
OR surfaces cleaned and disinfected with terminal cleaning protocol before implant procedures
HEPA filtration confirmed functional
Positive pressure differential verified
Minimum OR personnel count enforced throughout

For environmental control critical for implant surgery, including OR airflow, positive pressure standards, and traffic management specific to implant procedures, that guide covers the environmental requirements.

Instrument sterilization for implant procedures

All instruments used in implant procedures must be sterile. This includes:

Surgical instruments (standard pack)
Powered instruments (oscillating saw, drill): require sterilization of the handpiece or disposable sterile covers
Implant insertion instruments (holding forceps, screwdrivers, guides)
The implants themselves

Implant sterility:

Commercially supplied implants arrive sterile from the manufacturer with documented sterility assurance. They should not be re-sterilized unless specifically indicated by the manufacturer. Re-sterilization can alter implant surface characteristics (coating integrity, metallurgical properties) in ways that are not always apparent.

Pre-sterilized implants should be:

Inspected for packaging integrity before use
Confirmed within expiry date
Opened onto the sterile field using sterile technique immediately before use

For implant instrument sterilization standards, including the full instrument reprocessing protocol applicable to orthopedic instruments, that guide covers the sterilization standards.

Frequently asked questions

What is the most common bacteria causing TPLO SSI?

Staphylococcus pseudintermedius, including methicillin-resistant strains (MRSP), is the most commonly isolated pathogen from TPLO SSIs. MDR isolates are increasingly prevalent. Standard cephalosporin prophylaxis does not cover MRSP. Asepsis preventing MRSP from entering the wound is the primary prevention strategy.

Is lavage with saline sufficient for implant procedures?

Copious saline lavage removes loose debris and bacteria and is the standard baseline for wound lavage. For high-risk procedures or patients with elevated MRSP risk, antiseptic lavage before closure provides additional bacterial reduction including against biofilm-forming organisms. The evidence for antiseptic lavage in veterinary implant surgery is accumulating, particularly given the limitations of antibiotic prophylaxis against MRSP.

How long after TPLO can SSI develop?

SSI after TPLO can develop weeks to months after the procedure, not just in the immediate post-operative period. Early SSI (within 30 days) typically reflects intraoperative contamination. Late SSI (30 days to 12 months) may reflect delayed biofilm maturation, incision licking, or hematogenous seeding. Extended post-operative monitoring is appropriate for all TPLO patients.

Should all TPLO patients be screened for MRSP?

Pre-operative MRSP screening for all TPLO candidates is increasingly supported by the literature, particularly given the elevated SSI rates for this procedure and the treatment difficulty when MRSP is involved. Practices with high TPLO volume should consider a formal pre-operative screening protocol in consultation with a veterinary infectious disease specialist or dermatologist.

Orthopedic implant surgery is the procedure where asepsis gaps have the highest consequences. The contamination that a healthy immune system manages in soft tissue surgery cannot be managed once biofilm forms on a metal implant. Prevention through rigorous asepsis across every perioperative step is not a higher standard of care. It is the minimum standard for implant surgery.

Resources

The following sources were used as reference and background for this article:

NIH/PMC. Surgical site infection after 769 Tibial Plateau Leveling Osteotomies. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
DVM360. Improving Infection Rates After TPLO. dvm360.com
Veterinary Practice News. Old and New Thoughts on Infection Control. veterinarypracticenews.com
NIH/PMC. Comparison of SSI Rates in TPLO Using Perioperative vs. Peri- and Postoperative Antimicrobial Prophylaxis. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

X min read

Veterinary Surgical Hand Scrub Protocol Guide

The surgical hand scrub is performed before every sterile procedure. It removes transient bacteria from the skin and reduces resident flora to a level that the sterile glove can contain.

Skipping it, rushing it, or performing it incorrectly undermines the aseptic barrier regardless of how well everything else is done.

Quick answer: The standard surgical hand scrub uses antiseptic soap applied from fingertips to elbows for a minimum of 5 minutes. Hands stay above elbows throughout. Alcohol-based handrubs (ABHR) are a validated alternative with equivalent or longer-lasting effect.

Key takeaways

Initial scrubs require a minimum of 5 minutes to maximize skin-to-antiseptic contact time; subsequent same-day scrubs may be shorter
Hands must be held above elbow level at all times during scrubbing and rinsing to prevent recontamination from forearms
Fingernails must be short and polish-free: the subungual space harbors the highest bacterial load
Any contact with a non-sterile surface during scrubbing requires a complete restart
Alcohol-based handrub (ABHR) is a validated alternative to traditional scrubbing, with equivalent or longer-lasting antimicrobial effect
Closed gloving is the standard technique for sterile procedures; open gloving is reserved for non-sterile or field situations

Before you scrub: preparation

VetTechPrep: "All jewelry should be removed, and nails should be short."

Veterinary Surgery Online: "Fingernails should be trimmed short to prevent glove damage.

Dirt and bacteria lodged at the base of longer nails are harder to reach during scrubbing.

Nails should also be free of polish (even if clear) as they too can harbor bacteria."

Remove all rings, bracelets, and watches before entering the surgical prep area. These items harbor bacteria and cannot be decontaminated by scrubbing.

Agent selection

Two antiseptic agents are standard:

Chlorhexidine gluconate (4% or 2%):

Broad-spectrum: effective against gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria, yeasts, and some viruses
Residual activity: binds to skin proteins, continues working after rinsing
Less inactivated by organic material than povidone-iodine

Povidone-iodine (7.5–10%):

Broad-spectrum including bacteria, fungi, viruses, and spores
Minimal residual activity; effect dissipates quickly after rinsing
Can be inactivated by blood and organic debris

VetTechPrep: "The two most used scrubs are povidone-iodine (Betadine) and chlorhexidine-gluconate (Nolvasan)."

Veterinary Surgery Online: "Alcohol-based rubs have been shown to have the same immediate effect as chlorhexidine scrub but to last longer (Verwilghen 2011)."

They are associated with similar SSI rates as traditional scrub techniques.

Step-by-step traditional scrub protocol

Step 1: Pre-scrub washWet hands and forearms. Apply antiseptic soap. Wash thoroughly for 1 minute to remove gross contamination soil, organic material, surface bacteria. Rinse.

Step 2: Nail cleaningUse a nail pick under running water to clean under each fingernail. This is the highest-density bacterial area.

Step 3: Systematic scrub with brushApply soap to the brush. Work systematically, spending approximately equal time on each surface.

Veterinary Surgery Online: the sequence is:

All four surfaces of each finger on one hand
Back of the hand
Palm of the hand
Sides of the hand
Wrist
Forearm (in sections working toward elbow)
Repeat on the other hand

VetTechPrep: "A soap-soaked sterile brush/sponge is used to start a systematic scrub technique.

All four sides of each finger are scrubbed, and special attention to the fingernails should be taken as the area under the fingernails harbors the most bacteria."

Step 4: TimingVetTechPrep: "Initial scrubs for the day should last at least 5 minutes, to maximize skin-to-soap contact time."

Subsequent scrubs the same day (between cases) can be shorter typically 2 to 3 minutes provided the hands remained gloved throughout the previous case without contamination.

Step 5: Rinse hands-firstVeterinary Surgery Online: "Rinse hands and arms by passing them through the water in one direction only, from fingertips to elbow, while maintaining eye contact to avoid touching the sink.

Do not move the arm back and forth through the water."

Veterinary Surgery Online: "Remember to keep your hands up to prevent water from running from the elbow area (which is not as clean) towards your hands."

Step 6: Do not shake handsVeterinary Surgery Online: "Do not shake your hands to remove excess water.

Let the water drip off your arms before returning to the surgery suite to prevent water accumulating on the floor or contaminating your gown pack."

Critical rule throughout: VetTechPrep: "After scrubbing has commenced, the hands and arms can no longer contact non-sterile objects. If this happens, the scrub is completely started over."

Alcohol-based handrub (ABHR): the validated alternative

Veterinary Surgery Online: "Hand rubs are a newer alternative to hand scrubbing.

This technique uses an alcohol-based antiseptic solution that is rubbed onto dry, clean skin and is not scrubbed, rinsed, or dried with a towel."

Veterinary Surgery Online: "These solutions are proven to provide rapid and wide-spectrum antimicrobial activity, to decrease skin irritation, to improve compliance, and to reduce the risk of hand contamination by rinsing water."

ABHR procedure:

Wash hands with soap and water first (to remove gross contamination and any residual organic material)
Dry hands completely ABHR is applied to dry skin
Apply the recommended volume per manufacturer instructions
Rub in sequence: hands, wrists, forearms to elbows
Continue rubbing until completely dry do not wipe off

ABHR cannot be used if hands are visibly soiled. The traditional scrub is required in that case.

Gowning after the scrub

After rinsing, the scrubbed team member enters the surgical suite with hands held above elbow level.

The gown pack is opened by the circulating nurse (non-sterile) or from a sterile surface.

The scrubbed person takes the gown by the inner surface only, allows it to unfold, and slides arms into the sleeves without the hands advancing past the cuff.

University of Calgary: "Gowning and gloving is part of aseptic technique, to help decrease the spread of pathogens.

Learning how to properly gown and glove is important in all forms of medicine to decrease the rate of infection after surgeries."

Only the front of the gown from chest to table level and the sleeve cuffs are considered sterile. The back is not. Surgeons never reach behind themselves once gowned.

Closed gloving technique

Closed gloving is performed before advancing the hands through the gown cuffs.

Veterinary Clinical Skills Compendium: "Closed gloving = after 'scrubbing' (sudsing) and drying hands, your hands are within the cuffs of a sterile gown, or within a closed system, you are closed gloving.

This technique looks like you are using 'Puppet hands' to put on gloves over gown."

Why closed gloving:

The outer surface of the glove is handled entirely through the sterile gown sleeve
This prevents skin contact with the outside of the glove
If the glove is perforated later, the scrubbed skin beneath (not bare skin) is what the glove contacts

Open gloving (hands advance through cuffs first) is used when a sterile gown is not available field procedures, some farm situations. It carries a higher contamination risk than closed technique.

For aseptic technique in the broader surgical context, see aseptic technique in dog and cat surgery. For the sterile field this contributes to, see maintaining a sterile field in veterinary surgery.

For SSI prevention overall, see how to prevent surgical site infections in dogs.

Frequently asked questions

How long should a surgical hand scrub take?

VetTechPrep: "Initial scrubs should last at least 5 minutes." Between-case scrubs can be 2 to 3 minutes when hands stayed gloved. ABHR protocols vary by product; follow manufacturer timing instructions.

Can I wear nail polish when performing surgical scrubs?

No. Veterinary Surgery Online: "Nails should be free of polish (even if clear) as they too can harbor bacteria." Clear polish is not an exception.

Polish must be removed before any sterile procedure.

What happens if I accidentally touch the sink during scrubbing?

The scrub must restart entirely. VetTechPrep: "After scrubbing has commenced, the hands and arms can no longer contact non-sterile objects. If this happens, the scrub is completely started over."

There is no partial restart.

Is alcohol-based handrub actually as effective as a traditional scrub?

Yes, when applied correctly to clean hands. Veterinary Surgery Online: ABHR provides "the same immediate effect as chlorhexidine scrub but lasts longer."

It is associated with similar SSI rates and is endorsed by major surgical guidelines.

What is the difference between open and closed gloving?

Closed gloving handles the outer glove only through the sterile gown sleeve. Open gloving advances hands through the cuffs first. Closed is standard for sterile procedures; open is used in field settings.

Can a vet tech or nurse perform the surgical scrub, or only the surgeon?

Any team member who will enter the sterile field performs the surgical scrub: surgeons, surgical assistants, and scrubbed veterinary technicians. The same protocol applies regardless of role.

Resources

Veterinary Surgery Online. Hand Preparation/Scrubbing. vetsurgeryonline.com
VetTechPrep. Surgery Prep: Scrubbing, Gloving, Gowning. vettechprep.com
University of Calgary UCVM. Gowning, Gloving and Scrubbing. vet.ucalgary.ca
Veterinary Clinical Skills Compendium (UMN). Scrub, Gown, Closed Glove Technique. open.lib.umn.edu
Clinician's Brief. Preoperative Surgical Site Preparation in Veterinary Medicine. cliniciansbrief.com

X min read

Auditing Asepsis Compliance in Veterinary Clinics

Asepsis training establishes the standard. Audit determines whether the standard is being met.

Without audit, a clinic cannot distinguish between a team that maintains correct aseptic technique and one that has normalized gradual deviations from it. Both teams may describe their practices as compliant. Only observation-based audit can determine which is actually true.

What this covers: The design and implementation of asepsis compliance auditing in small animal veterinary practice, including observation-based audits, SSI surveillance, autoclave validation, environmental monitoring, and audit cycle management.Evidence base: AJVR 2026 SSI consensus data confirms that implementation of surveillance programs produces a "surveillance effect": the act of monitoring itself increases compliance. Simply participating in an audit program reduces SSI rates independent of any other intervention.Key finding: Higher care-bundle compliance yields fewer SSI cases. A quality improvement study reported a moderate negative correlation (r = −0.31) between care-bundle compliance and SSI incidence, with SSI rates dropping from 0.3% to 0.1% following structured audit implementation.Audit goal: Identify gaps between stated protocol and actual practice, distinguish individual errors from systemic patterns, and drive targeted improvement.

Key takeaways

Audit detects what self-reporting misses: Personnel consistently overreport their own compliance. Direct observation is the only reliable method for identifying intraoperative technique gaps.
The surveillance effect is real and significant: Documented in both veterinary and human surgical literature, the mere presence of an active audit program increases compliance independent of the specific findings.
SSI rate alone is an inadequate compliance metric: SSI is a lagging indicator influenced by many variables. Process compliance metrics are more actionable because they are directly modifiable.
Audits should distinguish individual from systemic errors: A single practitioner making a specific error is a training issue. Multiple practitioners making the same error repeatedly is a protocol or system design issue.
Audit findings must be fedback to the team: An audit that produces a report that no one acts on does not improve compliance. Feedback, action planning, and re-audit complete the cycle.
Autoclave monitoring is a distinct audit domain: Biological indicator validation is the most critical sterilization audit and must be performed regularly, not just when a problem is suspected.

Audit domain 1: Intraoperative technique observation

What it measures

Direct observation of surgical personnel during active procedures, assessing adherence to correct aseptic technique across scrubbing, gowning, gloving, sterile field maintenance, and OR behavior.

Why self-reporting is unreliable

Personnel who are asked whether they followed correct technique will almost universally report yes. AJVR 2025 found that 46.3% of observed procedures involved at least one aseptic protocol breach, yet the breach rate identified by self-report would be substantially lower.

The gap between self-report and observation is not primarily a matter of dishonesty. Most people genuinely do not notice their own minor technique violations. External observation is irreplaceable.

Observation method

Structured observation audit:

Assign a trained auditor (a senior clinician or designated compliance officer) to observe a sample of procedures
Use a standardized observation tool with defined scoring criteria for each technique element
Record all observed deviations without interrupting the procedure (except in cases of significant patient risk)
Debrief the team after the case, not during, to avoid disrupting active surgery
Document all findings with date, case type, personnel observed, and specific deviations

Sampling strategy:

Minimum: observe 10% of surgical procedures per month, distributed across procedure types and personnel
Higher risk: observe 100% of procedures after an SSI event, a new team member starts, or a significant breach is reported
Longitudinal: track the same personnel across multiple observations to assess improvement after training

For quality control measures evaluated in audits, including how auditing fits within the broader quality control framework for surgical asepsis, that guide covers the quality assurance architecture.

Audit domain 2: SSI surveillance

What it measures

Post-operative infection rates by procedure type, personnel, patient risk category, and time period.

Why SSI surveillance matters

SSI is the outcome that asepsis is designed to prevent. Tracking SSI rates provides the ultimate performance indicator and can identify temporal clusters that signal a systemic problem.

Key published benchmarks:

Veterinary SSI rates: 1.5% to 18% depending on procedure type and setting (Veterinary Nurse, 2023)
Clean wound class expected SSI rate: 1 to 5%
Clean-contaminated: 5 to 10%
Contaminated: 10 to 17%
Dirty-infected: 27%+

A clinic whose clean-wound SSI rate consistently exceeds 5% has a systemic problem that audit should help identify.

SSI definition consistency

The AJVR (2026) published a consensus on SSI definitions for veterinary medicine, noting that implementation of uniform definitions may initially appear to increase SSI rates as surveillance improves. This is the surveillance effect in action: more rigorous definition and counting does not mean more infections, but it does mean more accurate detection.

Clinics should adopt a standardized SSI definition and apply it consistently across all cases to enable meaningful trend analysis.

Surveillance infrastructure

Post-operative follow-up protocol: All surgical cases should have a defined follow-up contact at 10 to 14 days post-procedure to assess wound status
SSI recording system: A standardized case record capturing wound class, personnel involved, procedure duration, prophylaxis use, and outcome
Periodic analysis: Monthly or quarterly review of SSI rate by procedure type and by surgeon

For auditing OR standards compliance, including how SSI surveillance connects to OR environment standards assessment and the physical infrastructure audits that complement technique observation, that guide provides the OR-specific audit components.

Audit domain 3: Autoclave and sterilization validation

What it measures

Whether sterilization equipment is reliably producing sterile loads, and whether loads are being used within validated shelf life.

The three levels of sterilization monitoring

Chemical indicators (Class 1 to 6):

Chemical indicators on the outside and inside of instrument packs change color or appearance when exposed to the sterilization conditions. They confirm exposure to the sterilizing agent but do not confirm sterility.

External indicators confirm the pack has been through a sterilization cycle
Internal indicators confirm the agent penetrated the interior of the pack
Class 5 and 6 integrating indicators provide the closest chemical approximation to a sterility confirmation

Biological indicators (spore tests):

Biological indicators contain Geobacillus stearothermophilus spores that are killed only if sterilization conditions were sufficient to achieve sterility. A killed spore test confirms functional sterility of the autoclave cycle.

Biological indicators are the only method that directly confirms sterilization efficacy.

Recommended frequency: at minimum weekly in active veterinary surgical practices; after any autoclave service or malfunction; after any pack with a failed chemical indicator is identified.

Mechanical monitoring:

Temperature, pressure, and time records from each autoclave cycle should be logged and reviewed. Many modern autoclaves print cycle records automatically. These should be filed and reviewed periodically.

Sterilization audit checklist

[ ] Biological indicator run within the past week; result documented
[ ] Chemical indicator status checked on all packs before use
[ ] Pack integrity (no tears, no moisture) checked before use
[ ] Expiry dates on all packs confirmed
[ ] Autoclave service record current
[ ] Instrument reprocessing log maintained

Audit domain 4: Patient preparation compliance

What it measures

Adherence to clipping, antiseptic agent selection, scrub technique, and transport protocols.

Common preparation compliance gaps

Step	Common deviation	SSI consequence
Clipping timing	Night-before clipping rather than immediate pre-op	Significant: bacteria recolonize the surgical site overnight
Antiseptic direction	Reversed or random rather than centrifugal	Moderate: recontaminates the prepared center
Antiseptic application count	Single application rather than minimum two	Moderate: reduces antiseptic efficacy
Agent selection	Chlorhexidine applied near ears or eyes	Patient safety risk
Transport	Prepared site contacting non-sterile transfer surface	Low to moderate depending on contact

Observation method

Preparation compliance is best audited during the prep phase, not intraoperatively. A designated observer documents whether each preparation step was performed correctly before the patient is transported to the OR.

Audit domain 5: Environmental compliance

What it measures

Between-case disinfection, OR access control, airflow system function, and surface cleanliness.

Environmental audit items

[ ] Between-case floor mop and surface wipe documented
[ ] OR door access log (if maintained) reviewed for traffic during procedures
[ ] HEPA filtration system maintenance current
[ ] Positive pressure differential confirmed functional
[ ] Environmental surface swabs taken periodically (quarterly recommended for active ORs)
[ ] Humidity and temperature log reviewed

For breaks detected through auditing, including the specific break categories that observation-based auditing is most effective at detecting and the response protocols for each, that guide provides the break-level detail that audit findings map to.

Audit cycle management

The audit cycle

An effective asepsis audit program operates as a continuous cycle, not a one-time event:

Baseline audit: Establish current compliance rates across all audit domains
Gap identification: Identify specific areas where practice deviates from protocol
Root cause analysis: Determine whether gaps are individual (training issue) or systemic (protocol or equipment issue)
Targeted intervention: Training for individual gaps; protocol revision for systemic ones
Re-audit: Assess whether the intervention produced improvement
Monitoring: Continue sampling to confirm improvement is sustained

Audit frequency recommendations

Audit type	Recommended frequency
Intraoperative observation	Monthly (10% case sample minimum)
SSI rate review	Monthly
Autoclave biological indicator	Weekly
Patient preparation observation	Quarterly
Environmental compliance	Quarterly
Comprehensive program review	Annually

Feedback to the team

Audit findings that are not shared with the team do not produce change. Feedback should be:

Timely: Shared within one to two weeks of the audit observation, while the case is recent
Specific: Referenced to the specific deviation observed, not generalized
Non-punitive: Framed as performance data, not disciplinary input
Actionable: Accompanied by a clear corrective step

For errors identified in audits, including the most common error categories and the evidence for why training and audit together outperform training alone, that guide provides the error-level reference for interpreting audit findings.

The relationship between audit findings and training response should be direct and documented. When an audit identifies a recurring error in a specific category, the training calendar should reflect a targeted refresher for that category within 30 days. This closes the quality loop rather than leaving findings as reports without action.

For training that audits assess for compliance, including how the training program and audit program should be designed as complementary elements of a single quality system rather than independent activities, that guide covers the training-audit integration.

Frequently asked questions

How is an audit different from routine supervision?

Routine supervision is ongoing and informal. An audit is structured, documented, and comparative. Audits use standardized tools, record findings systematically, and compare results to defined standards and to previous audit cycles. Supervision catches problems in the moment; auditing identifies patterns over time.

Who should conduct asepsis audits in a veterinary clinic?

The clinical director, a senior surgeon, or a designated compliance officer. The auditor should be familiar with correct aseptic technique and must be credible to the team being audited. External auditors (visiting specialists or consultants) provide valuable perspective for annual comprehensive reviews.

Should audit findings be used in performance reviews?

With caution. If audit findings are linked to disciplinary consequences, personnel may under-disclose breaches or become resistant to the audit process. The most effective audit programs frame findings as quality improvement data rather than individual performance metrics. Pattern-level findings (repeated errors by the same person despite training) may eventually warrant a performance conversation, but this should not be the primary audit framing.

What should happen when an autoclave biological indicator fails?

Remove all packs sterilized since the last successful biological indicator result from use. Do not use any instruments from those packs. Have the autoclave serviced and repaired. Run a new biological indicator before returning the autoclave to service. Review all cases performed using instruments from potentially non-sterile packs for SSI monitoring. Document the incident and corrective actions taken.

For the checklist used to standardize audits, including the structured verification tool that serves as the reference standard against which audit observations are compared, that guide provides the operational baseline for compliance measurement.

Audit is the discipline that closes the gap between what a clinic believes its aseptic standards are and what they actually are. Without it, compliance is an assumption. With it, compliance becomes a measured, improvable performance metric. The clinics with the best surgical infection rates are invariably those that measure their performance systematically and act on what they find.

Resources

The following sources were used as reference and background for this article:

AVMA Journals. Surgical site infection definitions consensus in veterinary medicine. AJVR, 2026. avmajournals.avma.org
NIH/PMC. The effectiveness of aseptic non-touch technique audit cycle implementation on reducing SSI. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
NIH/PMC. Quality improvement approach for SSI prevention. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Veterinary Practice. Infection control in the surgical environment. veterinary-practice.com
The Veterinary Nurse. Surgical site infections: preparation, technique and perioperative prevention. theveterinarynurse.com

X min read

Environmental Asepsis and Airflow in Vet Surgery

Environmental contamination is a distinct and often underappreciated SSI pathway. Even when surgical technique is flawless and instruments are sterile, an inadequately controlled OR environment can introduce bacteria into the operative field through airborne routes.

Understanding the mechanisms of environmental contamination allows veterinary surgical teams to design and maintain ORs that work with technique rather than against it.

What this covers: The mechanisms of environmental contamination in the veterinary OR, the airflow standards that mitigate them, and the practical protocols for surface disinfection, traffic management, and environmental monitoring.Scope: Applies to the OR environment itself: the air, surfaces, and behavioral factors outside the sterile field that influence contamination at the surgical site.Key distinction from technique: Technique errors contaminate the sterile field through direct contact. Environmental contamination acts through indirect routes: airborne particles, surface residue, and disrupted pressure differentials. Both pathways matter; both require active management.Evidence note: Research in human surgical settings consistently links OR traffic density, door-opening frequency, and personnel movement to elevated airborne bacterial counts. The biological mechanisms are species-independent and apply equally in veterinary ORs.

Key takeaways

Human skin shedding is the dominant source of OR airborne contamination: Each person in the OR continuously sheds skin particles, many carrying bacteria. This is why personnel count and movement are direct contamination variables.
Door openings disrupt positive pressure and introduce corridor air: Each door opening during active surgery introduces a pulse of unfiltered air from adjacent non-sterile areas.
Air changes per hour determine how quickly contamination is removed: Rooms with fewer air changes per hour accumulate airborne bacteria faster than rooms with high air exchange rates.
Surfaces are a secondary contamination reservoir between cases: Inadequate between-case disinfection allows bacteria from one case to colonize surfaces the next surgical team contacts.
Environmental monitoring provides objective data rather than assumptions: Surface swabs and periodic air sampling confirm whether environmental controls are working.
Temperature and humidity affect microbial survival: Controlled temperature and humidity reduce the viability of airborne bacteria and support antiseptic agent performance.

Sources of environmental contamination in the OR

1. Personnel skin shedding

The surgical team is the largest source of airborne contamination in the OR during active procedures.

Human skin continuously sheds squames (skin cells), and these squames frequently carry bacteria from the skin surface, including Staphylococcus aureus, coagulase-negative staphylococci, and Staphylococcus pseudintermedius in veterinary settings.

Factors that increase shedding rate:

Movement: walking, reaching, and turning generate substantially more particles than standing still
Talking without a mask: exhaled droplets directly contaminate the air over the sterile field
Number of personnel: each additional person in the OR adds to the total shedding load

2. OR door openings

Each time an OR door opens:

The positive pressure differential is momentarily disrupted
A volume of unfiltered corridor air enters the OR
Bacteria-laden air from adjacent clinical areas mixes with the filtered OR air

Research in human surgical settings demonstrates that OR door-opening frequency during active surgery correlates with elevated airborne bacterial counts. CDC and JCAHO guidelines in human healthcare explicitly address traffic pattern management in the surgical suite on this basis.

3. Patient-origin contamination

The patient's own microbiome contributes to OR contamination:

Skin bacteria not eliminated during antiseptic prep remain viable on the prepared site
During surgery, blood and tissue fluids can aerosolize with electrosurgery or powered instruments
Patients with pre-existing skin infections or MRSP colonization carry higher contamination loads

4. Equipment and surface residue

Inadequately cleaned surfaces between cases can harbor bacteria from the previous procedure. Contact between personnel or instruments and these surfaces can reintroduce bacteria into the next sterile field.

Equipment that frequently harbors residual contamination if not specifically cleaned:

Overhead surgical light handles
IV pole surfaces
Cable insulation and suction tube exteriors
OR table adjustment mechanisms

Airflow: the primary environmental control

How OR ventilation works

OR ventilation systems serve two functions simultaneously:

Dilution: Introducing fresh filtered air to dilute and remove airborne particles
Pressure management: Maintaining positive pressure differential to prevent unfiltered air from entering

Both functions depend on air changes per hour (ACH): the number of times per hour the total room air volume is replaced.

ASHRAE Standard 170 (2021) specifies a minimum of 20 total ACH during occupied surgical conditions, with a minimum of 4 outdoor air changes. This rate ensures that contamination introduced by personnel activity or door openings is continuously diluted and removed.

The role of HEPA filtration

HEPA filtration captures particles at 99.97% efficiency for particles 0.3 microns and larger. Bacteria range from approximately 0.5 to 5 microns in diameter.

HEPA filtration ensures that recirculated air returns to the OR at a contamination level below the threshold for clinical significance.

HEPA filtration requirements for veterinary ORs:

Primary air supply must pass through HEPA filtration
Filter maintenance must follow manufacturer intervals; clogged filters reduce efficiency and airflow rate
Return air grilles must be positioned to maximize airflow across the entire OR rather than short-circuiting from supply to return

Positive pressure: mechanism and maintenance

Positive pressure in the OR means the air pressure inside the room exceeds adjacent spaces by a defined differential. This continuous outward airflow prevents corridor air from entering the OR when doors open or seal integrity is imperfect.

NIH veterinary surgical suite guidance: 2.5 Pa positive pressure relative to adjacent spaces.

Conditions that compromise positive pressure:

Propped OR doors during surgery
Simultaneous opening of multiple doors
HVAC system malfunction or filter clogging reducing airflow rate
Construction or renovation creating gaps in the OR envelope

Temperature and humidity control

Parameter	Recommended range	Rationale
Temperature	68 to 75 degrees F	Reduces microbial survival at lower end; prevents patient hypothermia at upper end
Relative humidity	30 to 60%	Low humidity reduces droplet suspension time; high humidity promotes bacterial survival

Extremely low humidity also increases electrostatic activity, which attracts particles to surfaces and personnel.

Traffic management as environmental control

The contamination arithmetic

Every person in the OR is a contamination source. Every door opening is a contamination event. The relationship is cumulative, not linear.

A procedure with 3 personnel and 2 door openings produces a fundamentally different contamination environment than the same procedure with 7 personnel and 12 door openings, even if individual technique is identical.

Traffic protocol standards

Pre-procedure supply confirmation:

Confirming all required supplies are in the OR before the first incision is the most effective single intervention for reducing during-surgery door openings. Door openings during surgery most commonly occur to retrieve forgotten items.

Personnel limit:

Only personnel with an active procedural role should be present during surgery. Observers without an active role and non-essential staff should not be in the OR during active surgery.

Door discipline:

When entry is necessary during active surgery, it should occur through a single door and be performed quickly with minimum door-open duration. The door should never be propped open during a procedure.

For OR standards that include environmental controls, including the physical infrastructure, traffic management policies, and between-case disinfection standards that implement environmental asepsis at the facility level, that guide covers the full OR standards framework.

Surface disinfection: the environmental reset between cases

What surfaces harbor bacteria

After any surgical case, the following surfaces should be considered contaminated and must be disinfected before the next case:

OR table surface and edges
Instrument tables and Mayo stand
Any equipment or surface contacted by non-sterile personnel during the case
Floor within the OR
Overhead light handles if adjusted by ungloved personnel

Disinfection agent requirements

The disinfectant must:

Have documented bactericidal activity against Staphylococcus species (including MRSP-equivalent strains)
Be approved for use on the specific surface material being cleaned
Have an observed contact time (surface must remain visibly wet for the specified duration)

Wiping a surface and immediately drying it defeats the disinfectant's mechanism. Contact time is non-negotiable.

Between-case vs. terminal cleaning

Between-case cleaning targets horizontal surfaces, the OR table, and floor. It resets surface contamination level before the next case.

Terminal cleaning (end of surgical day) includes all horizontal and vertical surfaces, walls, equipment exteriors, light housings, cable surfaces, and floor. It is more thorough and longer in duration.

After cases involving significant biological contamination (abscess drainage, contaminated wounds, open GI work), terminal cleaning standards should be applied before the next surgical case.

For environmental breaks in asepsis, including the specific break categories that arise from environmental failures and how to respond to each, that guide covers the break taxonomy for the environmental domain.

Environmental monitoring

Why monitoring matters

Environmental asepsis is frequently managed by assumption: the assumption that the HVAC system is running correctly, that cleaning was performed correctly, and that surface contamination is within acceptable limits. Environmental monitoring replaces assumption with data.

Monitoring methods

Surface swabs:

Swabs of high-contact surfaces taken after cleaning and before the first case of the day provide a baseline contamination measure. Periodic sampling (quarterly baseline; more frequent after any SSI cluster) detects trends before they manifest as clinical infections.

Air sampling:

Settle plates (open Petri dishes exposed during surgery) provide a simple measure of airborne particle deposition. Volumetric air samplers provide colony-forming unit counts per cubic meter and baseline reference data.

Positive pressure verification:

Simple smoke pencil testing at door thresholds during occupied conditions confirms pressure direction. Manometer measurement provides precise differential data.

Acting on monitoring data

Monitoring data is only useful if it triggers a response when findings exceed threshold. Clinics should define what surface contamination levels constitute acceptable versus requiring investigation, and what that investigation entails.

Environmental monitoring data should feed directly into the broader surgical asepsis quality system. The connection between OR environmental performance and surgical outcomes is what makes monitoring clinically meaningful rather than a bureaucratic exercise.

For the surgical asepsis that depends on environment, including how the five domains of surgical asepsis integrate and how environmental controls relate to patient preparation, instrument sterilization, and intraoperative technique, that guide covers the full surgical asepsis framework.

The environmental standard requirements are not uniform across procedure types. Orthopedic and implant procedures create a substantially more demanding environmental asepsis context, because contamination that might not cause SSI in a soft tissue procedure can directly cause implant failure in an orthopedic one.

For environmental control critical for implant surgery, including the elevated environmental asepsis requirements for procedures involving orthopedic hardware where a single contamination event can lead to implant failure, that guide covers the implant-specific environmental demands.

Frequently asked questions

How much does OR personnel count actually affect SSI rate?

Human surgical data consistently demonstrates that higher intraoperative personnel counts correlate with elevated SSI rates, primarily through the airborne contamination mechanism. While direct veterinary data is limited, the mechanism is biologically identical. Every additional non-essential person in the OR during surgery represents a quantifiable contamination risk.

Can we use a portable air purifier in the OR instead of a dedicated HVAC system?

Portable HEPA recirculators can supplement room air filtration but are not equivalent to a properly designed HVAC system. They do not provide positive pressure relative to adjacent spaces, do not deliver the required air changes per hour, and do not provide the directional airflow pattern that protects the sterile field. For dedicated surgical suites, a properly designed HVAC system is the required standard.

How often should OR HVAC filters be changed?

Per manufacturer specifications. As general guidance, pre-filters in high-use veterinary ORs typically require inspection monthly and replacement every 3 months. HEPA filters have longer service intervals but should be replaced on schedule regardless of appearance. Filter replacement schedules should be part of the facility maintenance log and reviewed during compliance audits.

Does keeping the OR cold help prevent infection?

Lower temperatures within the acceptable OR range (68 to 75 degrees F) reduce some aspects of microbial activity. However, patient hypothermia is itself a significant SSI risk factor. Patient warming during surgery should be maintained to prevent hypothermia-related immune suppression, which is a more significant SSI risk than the modest contamination reduction from cooler OR temperatures.

Environmental asepsis is the component of infection control that operates before the first instrument is touched and continues after the final suture is placed. The surgical team that understands airflow mechanics, controls OR traffic deliberately, monitors surface disinfection systematically, and verifies environmental conditions rather than assuming them is the team that gives its technique the environmental foundation it requires.

Resources

The following sources were used as reference and background for this article:

MEP Academy. How Operating Room HVAC Systems Work. mepacademy.com
NIH Office of Research Facilities. Veterinary Surgical Suites, Part II. orf.od.nih.gov
ASHRAE Standard 170 (2021). Referenced via envigilance.com
NIH/PMC. Laminar airflow ventilation systems in orthopaedic operating rooms: systematic review and meta-analysis. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
APSF. Recommendations for OR Ventilation. apsf.org
Veterinary Practice. Infection control in the surgical environment. veterinary-practice.com

X min read

Surgical Site Preparation in Dogs: Complete Guide

Surgical site preparation is the first line of defense against surgical site infection (SSI).

The goal is to reduce the bacterial load on the skin to the lowest achievable level before the incision is made.

Every step in the preparation protocol matters a single shortcut can undermine the entire chain.

Quick answer: Canine surgical site preparation follows a fixed sequence: clip a wide area in the prep room, perform an initial scrub for gross decontamination, then in the OR perform the aseptic scrub center-to-periphery using chlorhexidine or povidone-iodine, then drape. Never clip or scrub in the OR.

Key takeaways

Clip a wide margin around the incision site: at minimum 5 to 10 cm on each side; more is better
Clip in the prep room, not the OR: loose hair and dander are OR contaminants
Initial scrub removes gross contamination (oils, bacteria, debris) before the aseptic scrub begins in the OR
Aseptic scrub technique: target pattern center to periphery, discard gauze after each pass, never return toward center
Chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine are both acceptable: do not mix them on the same patient due to potential chemical incompatibility
Alcohol rinsing between antiseptic applications improves bacterial kill; contact time for each application must be respected

Why site preparation matters

Translocation of endogenous microbial flora is the most common route of surgical site infection. Skin preparation and aseptic techniques aim to reduce or eliminate the growth of resident and transient flora at the wound site, thereby reducing the morbidity and mortality rates from SSIs.

The skin surface harbors resident flora (permanently colonizing microorganisms) and transient flora (recently deposited organisms). Both can contaminate the wound at the moment of incision if not adequately reduced by preparation.

The preparation protocol addresses both.

Step 1: Pre-clipping assessment

Before clipping, assess the skin in the intended surgical field:

Note any existing wounds, abrasions, or skin conditions
Identify regional lymph nodes for palpation
Confirm the surgical site with the team before hair removal

Step 2: Hair clipping

Clipping is performed in the designated preparation area, not in the operating room. Loose hair shed into the OR environment is a contamination source.

Technique:

Use electric clippers with a surgical blade (size 40 preferred: finer cut, closer to skin)
Clip the direction of hair growth first, then against it for a closer result
Clip a wide field minimum 5 to 10 cm beyond the proposed incision on all sides
Do not clip the skin itself guard against clipper trauma which creates skin breaks and increases SSI risk

Blade size evidence: studies have evaluated different blade sizes for SSI risk. A size 40 blade (finer cut) has been associated with more SSIs in some studies due to skin microtrauma; a size 10 blade (less close) may reduce this risk. Practice varies; the key is avoiding visible skin irritation.

Male dog prepuce management: if the surgical field includes or borders the prepuce, flush it with 0.05% chlorhexidine diacetate solution for 2 minutes and displace it laterally in the field before draping.

Step 3: Initial scrub (gross decontamination)

Wear examination gloves and remove gross debris from the surgical site using gauze sponges and an antiseptic solution such as chlorhexidine gluconate 4% or povidone-iodine. Scrub the site gently until little to no gross debris remains. The use of clean, but not sterile, supplies for initial surgical site cleaning does not affect infection rates when the skin is intact.

The initial scrub is performed in the prep room before the patient enters the OR. It removes surface oils, organic matter, and loose debris.

This is not the aseptic scrub it prepares the skin for it.

Step 4: Patient transfer to OR

The patient is moved to the OR and positioned on the surgical table. The prepared site must not contact non-sterile surfaces during transfer.

Limbs may be loosely wrapped or positioned to avoid contact.

Step 5: Aseptic scrub in the OR

Once the patient is properly positioned, secured to the operating room table, and connected to all anesthetic monitoring equipment, the aseptic scrub can be performed.

The target pattern:

Begin scrubbing at the center of the proposed incision site, working outward in a circular target pattern until the edge of the clipped area is reached. Use a gentle motion to produce a lather. Discard the gauze and repeat the scrub as needed to allow for the appropriate contact time recommended by the scrub solution manufacturer.

Critical rules:

Always work center to periphery never return toward the incision center with a used gauze
Discard each gauze after a single outward pass
The scrubbing team wears sterile gloves
Contact time must be respected do not wipe off prematurely

Number of scrub cycles: typically three alternating cycles of antiseptic scrub and alcohol rinse (for chlorhexidine-based protocols) or antiseptic scrub and saline rinse (for povidone-iodine). Confirm your specific protocol with your clinic's surgical guidelines.

Antiseptic selection

Chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG)

Chlorhexidine kills a wide range of bacteria and has residual activity, meaning it continues working after application.

Chlorhexidine gluconate is often considered superior to povidone-iodine because of its longer residual action.

CHG is the more commonly recommended agent for veterinary surgical site preparation based on human medicine data showing superiority over PI, particularly with alcoholic formulations.

Povidone-iodine (PI)

Povidone-iodine is effective against bacteria, viruses, and fungi, and is commonly used in veterinary surgery.

Povidone-iodine has an excellent immediate antimicrobial effect. Most samples collected at post-asepsis did not present bacterial growth, both for animals subjected to povidone-iodine (74%) or chlorhexidine (70%) protocols.

PI has excellent immediate kill but minimal residual activity once dry.

Do not mix antiseptics

There is some evidence to suggest it is important not to mix the two on the same patient do not use chlorhexidine gluconate for initial prep and then povidone-iodine for the final prep. Chlorhexidine gluconate is cationic and povidone-iodine is anionic, which together are chemically unsuited. There is concern that when used together, they may provide limited or no skin antisepsis as the iodine inactivates the chlorhexidine.

Choose one antiseptic and use it throughout the entire preparation protocol.

Step 6: Draping

After the aseptic scrub, the sterile team applies four corner drapes secured with towel clamps, followed by a large fenestrated drape over the patient and table.

Draping rules: drapes can only be moved away from the incision site. A drape moved toward the incision contaminates the sterile field.

For the full draping guide, see draping techniques in small animal surgery. For the surgical hand scrub that precedes site preparation, see veterinary surgical hand scrub protocol guide.

For the SSI prevention overview, see how to prevent surgical site infections in dogs.

Frequently asked questions

Can I clip and scrub in the operating room?

No. Clipping should always be performed in a designated prep area separate from the OR. Loose hair contaminated with skin bacteria sheds into the OR environment and settles on sterile surfaces.

Clipping in the OR is a recognized SSI risk factor.

How wide should the clip area be?

At minimum 5 to 10 cm beyond the proposed incision on all sides.

In practice, clip wider than you think you need running out of prepared skin during surgery is worse than clipping a little more than necessary.

Should I use chlorhexidine or povidone-iodine?

Both are acceptable. Chlorhexidine has longer residual activity; povidone-iodine has excellent immediate kill. Do not mix them.

Most current guidance leans toward chlorhexidine (ideally in alcoholic formulation) based on human surgery data showing superior SSI reduction, though veterinary-specific evidence is more limited.

How many scrub cycles are required?

Protocol varies by clinic. A typical approach is three antiseptic scrub cycles with alcohol rinse between each.

The key is achieving the required contact time for your chosen antiseptic and removing each gauze after a single outward pass. Follow the antiseptic manufacturer's contact time recommendation.

Can I scrub toward the incision center if I see a missed area?

Never. Once a gauze has passed outward, it is contaminated with the organisms it picked up from the skin periphery.

A new gauze must be used for any additional scrubbing of the central area. Returning inward with a used gauze violates the core principle of aseptic scrub technique.

Resources

Clinician's Brief. Preoperative Surgical Site Preparation in Veterinary Medicine. cliniciansbrief.com
PMC. Comparative Clinical Effectiveness of Preoperative Skin Antiseptic Preparations of CHG and PI for Preventing SSIs in Dogs. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
PMC. Skin Asepsis Protocols as a Preventive Measure of SSI in Dogs: Chlorhexidine-Alcohol versus Povidone-Iodine. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
The Veterinary Nurse. Surgical Site Infections: Preparation, Technique and Perioperative Prevention. theveterinarynurse.com
VetNurse. Surgical Skin Preparation: Best Practice Protocol. vetnurse.com.au

X min read

PPE Use and Barrier Protection in Veterinary Clinics

Personal protective equipment (PPE) in veterinary practice serves two simultaneous purposes: protecting staff from patients, and protecting patients from staff and from each other.

Neither direction of protection can be neglected. Failure in either direction puts patients, staff, or the public at risk.

Quick answer: Veterinary PPE includes exam gloves, surgical gloves, bite-resistant gloves, masks, N95 respirators, gowns, and eye protection. Selection depends on the procedure, the patient's disease status, and splash or aerosol risk. Fewer than 40% of veterinary staff use appropriate PPE consistently.

Key takeaways

Exam gloves are the baseline PPE for any patient contact involving bodily fluids, non-intact skin, feces, or mucous membranes
Surgical gloves differ from exam gloves: they are sterile, thinner, and used only for sterile procedures
Eye protection is required whenever splash is possible dental procedures, wound lavage, necropsy, and many laboratory procedures
N95 respirators are required for aerosol-generating procedures in patients with suspected respiratory pathogens; surgical masks do not filter aerosols
OSU CVM: fewer than 40% of veterinary staff use appropriate PPE consistently compliance is a recognized gap
PPE removal sequence matters as much as donning sequence: incorrect removal contaminates skin and clothing

Why PPE compliance matters

OSU CVM: "Less than 40% of veterinarians and staff reported using the appropriate PPE for given situations."

OSU CVM: "When observing PPE removal by healthcare providers in one study, almost 50% inadvertently contaminated their skin or clothing."

OSU CVM: "Failure to properly use PPE puts you, your staff, and patients at increased risk for disease.

In some cases, disease outbreaks can occur in clinics and illness can be very severe, even leading to death."

PPE use is not optional for high-risk situations.

AVMA: "Drawing blood from a dog suspected or known to have leptospirosis poses greater biological health hazards than drawing blood from a clinically healthy dog.

The disease transmission risk warrants elevated caution and PPE."

Gloves: types and selection

Exam gloves (nitrile or latex)

The baseline barrier for general clinical work.

CVMA: "Nitrile gloves should be worn routinely when contact with feces, body fluids, vomitus, exudates, and non-intact skin is likely.

They should be worn when performing dental or obstetric procedures, resuscitations, and necropsies and when handling diagnostic specimens."

Nitrile is preferred over latex due to lower allergy risk for both staff and clients.

Indications:

All patient examinations involving bodily fluids
Wound assessment and dressing changes
Handling fecal samples, urine, aspirates, or swabs
Dental procedures (high splash risk)
Any contact with animals of unknown infectious status

Surgical gloves

Sterile, powderless, and considerably thinner than exam gloves for tactile sensitivity. Used exclusively for sterile procedures.

Surgical gloves are donned using closed gloving technique after a full surgical scrub or ABHR. They are not interchangeable with exam gloves for sterile procedures.

Bite-resistant gloves

Mahan Law: "Staff members should have access to bite-resistant gloves for working with potentially fractious animals."

These are not sterile and not appropriate for aseptic work. They protect against puncture and laceration. They should be accessible in reception, examination rooms, and kennels.

Masks: surgical masks vs. N95 respirators

These two types of masks serve fundamentally different purposes and are not interchangeable.

Surgical masks

OSU CVM: "Face masks (surgical) are used to prevent exposure of the mucous membranes of the eyes, nose, and mouth to pathogens."

Surgical masks block large droplets and splatter. They are appropriate for:

Routine surgical procedures (as part of full surgical attire)
Procedures with splash risk to the mouth or nose
General barrier between staff and patient

Surgical masks do not filter aerosols. They do not provide respiratory protection against airborne pathogens.

N95 respirators

N95 respirators filter at least 95% of airborne particles 0.3 microns or larger.

They are required when:

A patient has confirmed or suspected airborne infectious disease (e.g., influenza, bordetella in kennel situations with active outbreak)
Aerosol-generating procedures are performed on patients with respiratory pathogens
Staff work in high-risk situations such as necropsy of animals with zoonotic pathogens

N95 respirators require fit testing to be effective. An N95 that does not fit correctly provides negligible protection over a surgical mask.

Eye and face protection

OSU CVM: "Face protection such as masks, goggles, and full-face shields prevent exposure of the mucous membranes of the eyes, nose, and mouth to pathogens."

OSU CVM: "These items are warranted whenever there is a risk for splashes or sprays onto a person's mucous membranes."

Situations requiring eye protection:

Procedure	Recommended protection
Dental scaling	Face shield or goggles + mask
Wound lavage with syringe	Goggles or face shield
Necropsy	Full face shield
Blood draws from leptospirosis-suspected dogs	Goggles + mask
Ear flushing/irrigation	Goggles
Surgery (routine)	Surgical mask minimum; goggles optional

OSU CVM: "Items used for the above should be single-use disposable (surgical mask) or reusable after cleaned and disinfected (face shield, goggles)."

Protective outerwear: gowns, lab coats, and aprons

CVMA: "The purpose of protective outerwear is to limit the transfer of pathogens between the wearer and the patient, and to limit contamination of the wearer's clothing."

Lab coats:Baseline protection for routine clinical work. They prevent contamination of personal clothing and can be laundered. They are not fluid-resistant without specific coating.

Disposable gowns:Used for higher-risk situations: isolation cases, procedures with significant fluid exposure, or when the lab coat cannot be immediately changed between contaminated patients.

IndeVets: "Gowns/coveralls lab coats, cloth surgical gowns, change of scrubs, and even trash bags work in a pinch."

Sterile surgical gowns:Used exclusively for sterile surgical procedures. Not interchangeable with non-sterile disposable gowns.

Waterproof aprons:For procedures with heavy fluid volume necropsy, parturition, large wound irrigation.

PPE for specific high-risk situations

Isolation patients (suspected or confirmed contagious disease)

AVMA: patients with suspected leptospirosis warrant "double glove, face shields or the combination of masks and eye protection, disposable gown, isolation ward."

Full isolation PPE protocol:

Disposable gown (new for each entry)
Double gloves (outer pair removed on exit, inner pair with glove disposal)
Goggles or face shield
N95 if respiratory transmission is possible
Dedicated footwear or disposable shoe covers

All PPE is removed before leaving the isolation area. AAHA Infection Control Guidelines specify a defined sequence: PPE is removed inside the room before touching the door handle.

Necropsy

CVMA: necropsy warrants full PPE due to "potential contact with infectious body fluids, aerosols, and contaminated sharps."

Full necropsy PPE: double gloves, face shield, gown or waterproof apron, N95 if respiratory pathogen is possible, cut-resistant gloves when opening body cavities in large animals.

Radiography

AVMA PPE list: "Lead-lined radiology thyroid guard, lead-lined radiology apron, radiology eyewear, lead-lined radiology gloves." These are not infection control items but physical hazard PPE required for radiation safety.

They require annual inspection and replacement when damaged.

PPE donning and removal sequence

Donning order: gown first, then mask/respirator, then eye protection, then gloves last.

Removal order is the reverse and equally critical. Gloves are removed first (the most contaminated item), then eye protection, then gown, then mask. Each step should avoid touching the contaminated outer surfaces.

OSU CVM: "Almost 50% of healthcare providers inadvertently contaminated their skin or clothing" during PPE removal. Removal should be practiced with deliberate attention until the sequence becomes automatic.

Hand hygiene at minimum, glove removal followed by hand washing or ABHR is performed after PPE removal is complete.

For the surgical scrubbing and sterile gloving that applies specifically to aseptic surgical procedures, see veterinary surgical hand scrub protocol. For isolation protocols for infectious patients, see isolation protocols for infectious dogs.

For aseptic technique in the operating room, see aseptic technique in dog and cat surgery.

Frequently asked questions

Do I need gloves for every patient interaction?

Not every interaction petting or walking a healthy dog does not require gloves.

Gloves are required when there is realistic risk of contact with bodily fluids, non-intact skin, feces, or mucous membranes, or when the patient's infectious status is unknown.

Can I reuse disposable gloves between patients if I use hand sanitizer on them?

No. Single-use gloves are designed for one patient contact. OSHA and AVMA guidelines do not support decontaminating and reusing exam gloves. A new pair is used for each patient.

My clinic does not have face shields. Can I use safety glasses instead?

Safety glasses without side panels provide minimal splash protection. OSU CVM specifies goggles that "wrap around the sides of the face or include side-protectors" as the appropriate choice.

Standard safety glasses are not equivalent to clinical goggles.

Are surgical masks sufficient for working with a dog that may have leptospirosis?

No. AVMA: leptospirosis-suspected dogs warrant "face shields or the combination of masks and eye protection." A surgical mask alone does not provide adequate protection for a high-risk zoonotic patient.

How often should PPE training be refreshed?

IndeVets recommends asking what PPE protocols are in place at any new practice and reviewing them on arrival. AVMA recommends regular refresher training.

Staff training at hiring and at least annually when protocols change is a reasonable minimum standard.

What PPE is needed when handling a dog with suspected parvovirus?

Full contact precautions: disposable gown and exam gloves (double-glove recommended), with eye protection if splash is possible.

Parvovirus is environmentally stable; PPE must be removed before leaving isolation, and contaminated surfaces must be disinfected with a parvocidal agent.

Resources

AVMA. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). avma.org
OSU CVM. Types of PPE and Indications for Use Based on Risk Assessment. ohiostate.pressbooks.pub
OSU CVM. Risk Assessment and Introduction to PPE Part 2. ohiostate.pressbooks.pub
Mahan Law. Health and Safety Risks in Veterinary Practices. mahanlaw.com
CVMA. Personal Protective Equipment. cvma-watchdog.net

X min read

Asepsis in Orthopedic Implant Surgery

What this covers: The specific asepsis requirements for orthopedic implant procedures in dogs and cats, why implants elevate SSI risk, the role of biofilm, MRSP considerations, and the components of an enhanced implant surgery asepsis protocol.Evidence base: TPLO SSI retrospective study (769 procedures; PMC10133455); DVM360 TPLO protocol improvement study; Veterinary Practice News MRSP and implant infection data; TPLO SSI rate review (PMC11946642).Key clinical fact: Bacteria commonly involved in veterinary SSI, particularly Staphylococcus species including MRSP, form biofilms on implant surfaces that prevent host immune response and antibiotic penetration. This makes prevention through asepsis more important than treatment after infection occurs.

Key takeaways

Implant surface provides bacteria a substrate for biofilm, bypassing host immunity.
MRSP-colonized dogs have a significantly elevated SSI risk for implant procedures.
TPLO SSI rates of 7 to 28% have been reported; stricter asepsis reduces this substantially.
Implant-associated infection usually requires implant removal for resolution.
Double gloving is recommended for all implant procedures.
OR traffic restriction is more critical for implant procedures than routine soft tissue surgery.
Intraoperative lavage before closure addresses contamination accumulated during the procedure.

Why implants change the asepsis standard

The implant-associated infection mechanism

All surgical procedures carry SSI risk. Implant procedures carry additional risk because the implant itself creates a favorable environment for bacterial colonization.

How this works:

During surgery, bacteria are introduced into the wound through any asepsis lapse
Bacteria adhere to the implant surface (metal plates, screws, pins) within minutes to hours
They begin producing a polysaccharide extracellular matrix: biofilm
Within the biofilm, bacteria are physically protected from host neutrophils and macrophages
Antibiotic molecules cannot penetrate the biofilm at clinically achievable concentrations
The infection persists indefinitely unless the implant is removed

Reported SSI rates for veterinary implant procedures

The highest-volume implant procedure in veterinary small animal surgery is the tibial plateau leveling osteotomy (TPLO) for cranial cruciate ligament repair.

Published SSI rates for TPLO:

Overall SSI rate 0.8 to 14.3% in most cohort studies (PMC11946642)
Some reports document rates of 19 to 28% including all complications (DVM360)
The Finnish MRSP outbreak further elevated institutional SSI rates during that period

A retrospective study of 769 TPLO procedures (PMC10133455) confirmed that MDR bacteria isolation correlated with development of major infections requiring additional surgical treatment.

The enhanced asepsis protocol for implant surgery

Standard surgical asepsis applies to all procedures. Implant surgery requires every component of that standard plus specific enhancements.

Pre-operative preparation enhancements

Surgical site preparation:

Immediate pre-operative clipping only (no night-before clipping)
Generous clip margins beyond anticipated incision
Minimum three-pass antiseptic scrub sequence
CHG-alcohol or PVI-alcohol combination for optimal immediate plus residual activity
Full contact time observed; site fully dry before draping

Pre-operative MRSP risk assessment:

Antimicrobial prophylaxis timing:

Note: Standard prophylaxis does not cover MRSP. Asepsis is the primary prevention for MRSP.

Intraoperative enhancements

Double gloving:

OR traffic restriction:

Specific traffic standards:

Only essential personnel present
OR door remains closed throughout the procedure
All required supplies confirmed in the OR before first incision
No personnel re-entry during the procedure unless clinically essential

Implant handling:

Implants remain in sterile packaging until immediate use
Implants are transferred to the sterile field using sterile technique
No implant contacts any non-sterile surface after removal from packaging
If an implant is inadvertently contaminated, it is replaced; contaminated implants are never "cleaned" and returned to the field

Intraoperative lavage:

Surgical wound lavage before closure is standard for implant procedures. Copious sterile saline lavage removes loose debris, blood clots, and free bacteria that accumulated during the procedure.

Post-operative considerations

E-collar or recovery suit: Essential. Licking the incision introduces oral bacteria including Staphylococcus species directly onto a wound with an underlying implant.

Activity restriction: Extended (typically 8 to 12 weeks for bone healing procedures). Physical activity stress can disrupt healing and may contribute to implant failure.

Environmental asepsis for implant procedures

The OR environment standard for implant procedures should meet or exceed the standard for general surgical procedures.

Specific environmental considerations:

Dedicated orthopedic surgical suite where available
OR surfaces cleaned and disinfected with terminal cleaning protocol before implant procedures
HEPA filtration confirmed functional
Positive pressure differential verified
Minimum OR personnel count enforced throughout

Instrument sterilization for implant procedures

All instruments used in implant procedures must be sterile. This includes:

Surgical instruments (standard pack)
Powered instruments (oscillating saw, drill): require sterilization of the handpiece or disposable sterile covers
Implant insertion instruments (holding forceps, screwdrivers, guides)
The implants themselves

Implant sterility:

Pre-sterilized implants should be:

Inspected for packaging integrity before use
Confirmed within expiry date
Opened onto the sterile field using sterile technique immediately before use

For implant instrument sterilization standards, including the full instrument reprocessing protocol applicable to orthopedic instruments, that guide covers the sterilization standards.

Frequently asked questions

What is the most common bacteria causing TPLO SSI?

Is lavage with saline sufficient for implant procedures?

How long after TPLO can SSI develop?

Should all TPLO patients be screened for MRSP?

Resources

The following sources were used as reference and background for this article:

NIH/PMC. Surgical site infection after 769 Tibial Plateau Leveling Osteotomies. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
DVM360. Improving Infection Rates After TPLO. dvm360.com
Veterinary Practice News. Old and New Thoughts on Infection Control. veterinarypracticenews.com
NIH/PMC. Comparison of SSI Rates in TPLO Using Perioperative vs. Peri- and Postoperative Antimicrobial Prophylaxis. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

X min read

Asepsis Training for Veterinary Staff

Asepsis training in veterinary practice is not a one-time orientation event. It is a continuous program with defined curriculum, structured competency assessment, and scheduled refresher cycles.

The distinction matters because the evidence is clear: knowledge of correct aseptic technique does not reliably translate into consistent intraoperative behavior without external monitoring and feedback. Training that addresses only knowledge without building the behavioral and cultural components of correct asepsis produces limited improvement.

What this covers: The design, content, delivery, and assessment components of an effective asepsis training program for veterinary surgical staff.Who needs training: All personnel involved in surgical procedures, including surgeons, veterinary nurses, scrub technicians, circulating nurses, and ancillary staff who clean and prepare the OR.Evidence base: AJVR (2025) documented a 46.3% aseptic protocol breach rate during scrubbing, gowning, and gloving in veterinary students, with no association between breach rate and prior experience. This data indicates that experience alone does not maintain aseptic performance without structured reinforcement.Training goal: Not just knowledge of correct technique but consistent performance of correct technique under real surgical conditions, including the ability to recognize and name breaks in the sterile field.

Key takeaways

Knowledge is necessary but not sufficient: Studies consistently show that personnel who can describe correct aseptic technique still make technique errors in practice. Competency assessment must include observed performance, not just written tests.
No association exists between experience level and breach rate: AJVR 2025 found no significant difference in protocol breach rates based on prior scrub experience. Experienced staff need refresher programs as much as new staff.
The cultural component of training is as important as the technical component: Training must address the expectation that breaks will be named and corrected immediately, without hierarchy or blame.
Competency assessment should be periodic, not only at orientation: A one-time assessed training at hiring does not maintain performance over months and years of practice.
Different staff roles require different training emphasis: Surgeons, scrub technicians, circulating nurses, and OR cleaners share a common asepsis foundation but have role-specific responsibilities that training should address separately.
SSI surveillance data should feed back into training: If post-operative infection rates rise, training is one of the first corrective levers to pull.

Training curriculum: what to cover

Core content for all surgical personnel

1. Foundations of surgical asepsis

Definition and scope: sterility vs. asepsis vs. medical asepsis
The surgical site infection pathway: how bacteria enter, colonize, and cause SSI
Wound class and SSI risk stratification (clean, clean-contaminated, contaminated, dirty)
The five domains of surgical asepsis: patient prep, instrument sterilization, team preparation, OR environment, intraoperative technique

2. Hand hygiene and surgical hand antisepsis

Correct traditional scrub technique: sequence, surfaces, duration
Alcohol-based surgical hand rub (ABHR): correct application and contact time
Common failures: insufficient duration, missed surfaces, incorrect drying technique
When to re-scrub vs. when ABHR suffices between cases

3. Gowning and gloving

Closed gloving technique: step-by-step with supervised practice
Open gloving: when used and critical failure points
Gown donning without surface contamination
Double gloving: rationale and technique for orthopedic procedures

4. Patient preparation

Clipping timing and technique (immediate pre-op; clippers vs. razors)
Antiseptic agent selection by site and species
Centrifugal scrub direction and application count
Common preparation errors and their consequences

5. Sterile field principles

Boundaries of the sterile field: physical and procedural
Rules of the sterile field: what belongs, what does not
Instrument handling: passing, dropping below table level, replacement protocol
Draping: application, stability, no-reposition rule

6. OR behavior and environment

Movement in and around the sterile field
Traffic management during active procedures
OR door discipline during surgery
Talking, sneezing, and mask discipline

7. Break recognition and correction

What constitutes a break vs. an error
The designated field monitor role
Non-punitive naming and correction culture
The correct immediate response to each break category

Role-specific content

Role	Additional training focus
Surgeon	Decision-making in complex break scenarios; antibiotic prophylaxis timing
Scrub technician	Instrument table setup; sterile opening technique; instrument count protocol
Circulating nurse	Opening sterile supplies; monitoring OR entry; supporting field monitor
OR cleaner / support staff	Between-case disinfection protocols; what is and is not a sterile surface

Training delivery formats

Initial orientation training

All new surgical personnel should complete a structured orientation before participating in procedures, consisting of:

Didactic component: Lecture or self-directed module covering foundations, technique standards, and break recognition. Duration: 2 to 4 hours depending on role.
Demonstration: Supervised observation of correct scrub, gown, and glove technique by a trained observer.
Supervised practice: Repeated practice of hand antisepsis, gowning, and gloving until technique is correct without correction needed.
Assessed competency: Observed performance of a complete scrub-gown-glove sequence with structured scoring. Personnel should not participate in surgical cases without passing competency assessment.

Ongoing training and refresher cycles

Orientation training alone is insufficient to maintain performance. Refresher programs should include:

Annual competency re-assessment: Observed scrub, gown, and glove performance scored against a structured rubric
Case-specific debrief: After any case where an aseptic break is documented, a team debrief reviews what occurred and what the correct response was
SSI event review: When a post-operative SSI is identified, a structured case review examines all recorded perioperative aseptic practices
Protocol update training: When antiseptic agents, sterilization methods, or OR procedures change, training must precede implementation

For the checklist staff should follow after training, including the phase-by-phase verification tool that trained personnel use to apply their training consistently during every procedure, that guide provides the operational reference.

Competency assessment: standards and methods

What competency assessment must include

Written tests confirm knowledge. They do not confirm performance. Competency assessment in surgical asepsis must include direct observation of behavior.

Minimum competency assessment components:

Component	Method	Pass standard
Knowledge of asepsis principles	Written or oral examination	80% or higher
Surgical hand antisepsis	Observed performance with structured rubric	Zero critical errors
Gowning	Observed performance	Gown exterior not contaminated
Gloving	Observed performance (closed technique)	Bare skin not contacting glove exterior
Sterile field rules	Scenario-based questioning	Correct response to 4/5 scenarios
Break recognition	Observed or video-based identification	Identifies all presented breaks

Critical errors are those that would result in definite contamination of the sterile field: ungloved skin touching the glove exterior, gown exterior contacting the scrub suit, returning a dropped instrument to the sterile field.

Who conducts competency assessment

Assessment requires a trained observer who knows what correct technique looks like and can distinguish it from incorrect. This is not a self-assessment activity. Peer observation by another trained staff member, supervised by a senior surgeon or clinical director, is the appropriate structure.

Documenting competency

All competency assessments should be dated, signed, and filed. In the event of an SSI, documented competency records demonstrate due diligence and form part of the clinical governance record.

Building a training culture

The most consequential training outcome is not a passing score on a competency assessment. It is a surgical team that names and corrects breaks immediately, regardless of who made them, without judgment or delay.

This outcome requires explicit attention in training, not just technical skill instruction.

Elements of a correction culture that training should address:

The designated field monitor role is a legitimate function, not a policing one: Every team member should understand that the field monitor's job is patient safety, and naming a break is a clinical act, not a personal criticism.
Seniority does not protect against errors: Training should explicitly address the documented tendency for junior staff to avoid correcting senior personnel. The contamination consequences of a missed break are identical regardless of who made it.
Immediate correction is always the right response: There is no scenario in which naming a break later is better than naming it when it occurs.

For the breaks in asepsis that training prevents, including the full taxonomy of break categories, their mechanisms, and the response framework that trained staff should apply, that guide provides the reference material for break-specific training content.

Training scenarios built around specific break categories are more effective than general technique reminders. Simulated break identification exercises, where trainees watch a gowning or gloving sequence and name every deviation, build the observation skills that field monitoring depends on. This kind of scenario-based training also normalizes the act of naming breaks, reducing the cultural hesitation that allows violations to go uncorrected in real procedures.

For the errors addressed through staff training, including the published incidence data for each error category and why experience level does not predict error rate, that guide provides the evidence base for training priority decisions.

Connecting training to audit

Training and audit form a cycle. Training establishes the standard. Audit measures whether the standard is being met. Audit findings drive training refinement.

A clinic that trains without auditing does not know whether training is working. A clinic that audits without training does not have a systematic way to address identified gaps.

For auditing trained staff for compliance, including how to structure observation-based audits, what to measure, and how audit findings should feed back into training program revision, that guide covers the audit component of the training-audit cycle.

Frequently asked questions

How often should asepsis training be repeated?

At minimum annually for all surgical personnel, with additional training triggered by: any SSI event, any documented significant aseptic break, changes to antiseptic agents or sterilization equipment, or new procedures being introduced to the practice. High-volume practices may benefit from semi-annual refreshers.

Should asepsis training be role-specific or universal?

Both. A shared foundational curriculum ensures every person in the OR understands the same principles and the same correction expectations. Role-specific training then addresses the technical responsibilities of each position. Surgeons, scrub technicians, and OR cleaners share the foundation but have different intraoperative responsibilities.

Can online or self-directed training replace observed competency assessment?

No. Online training is an effective delivery format for foundational knowledge. It does not substitute for observed performance assessment. A person who completes an online module on closed gloving technique has not demonstrated that they can perform it correctly. Observed assessment is irreplaceable.

What should happen when a staff member fails a competency assessment?

Additional supervised practice followed by re-assessment. Failing a competency assessment is not a disciplinary event; it is a training event. The appropriate response is remedial practice, not penalty. Personnel should not participate in surgical cases until competency is confirmed.

How should training address MRSP and resistant organisms?

As part of the infection consequence module: explain that antibiotic-resistant organisms including MRSP are increasingly prevalent in veterinary surgical infections, that they are harder to treat when they do occur, and that consistent aseptic technique is the primary prevention strategy. This provides context for why technique rigor matters beyond routine infections.

For the core technique covered in training, including the complete technical reference for every step of aseptic technique that training must cover, that guide serves as the curriculum content source for the technical components.

Asepsis training works when it is designed as a continuous program rather than a one-time event, when competency is assessed through observed performance rather than knowledge tests alone, and when the cultural expectation of immediate, non-judgmental break correction is built into the program from the start. The training that produces the best aseptic outcomes is not the most comprehensive lecture. It is the one that most reliably changes behavior in the OR.

Resources

The following sources were used as reference and background for this article:

AVMA Journals. Aseptic protocol breaches are common among veterinary students. AJVR, 2025. avmajournals.avma.org
AVMA Journals. Surgical site infection definitions consensus in veterinary medicine. AJVR, 2026. avmajournals.avma.org
NIH/PMC. Assessing the effect of a canine surgical-neutering educational programme. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
NIH/PMC. The effectiveness of aseptic non-touch technique audit cycle implementation on reducing SSI. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Improve Veterinary Education. VTCert Surgical Nursing module. improveinternational.com
Veterinary Practice. Infection control in the surgical environment. veterinary-practice.com

X min read

Dental Surgical Asepsis in Cats

Dental surgical asepsis in cats is crucial to prevent infections during and after oral surgeries. Cats often require dental procedures for issues like tooth extractions, gingivitis, or oral tumors. Maintaining a sterile environment helps protect your cat’s health and promotes faster healing.

This article explains what dental surgical asepsis means for cats, why it matters, and how veterinary teams achieve it. You will learn the key steps to keep the surgical area clean and safe, what instruments and techniques are used, and how you can support your cat’s recovery at home.

What is dental surgical asepsis in cats?

Dental surgical asepsis refers to the methods used to keep the surgical site free from harmful bacteria and contaminants during dental procedures on cats. It involves sterilizing instruments, preparing the cat’s mouth, and maintaining a clean environment throughout surgery.

Proper asepsis reduces the risk of post-surgical infections, which can cause pain, delayed healing, or more serious complications. It is a standard part of veterinary dental care to ensure the best outcomes for feline patients.

Definition clarity: Dental surgical asepsis means preventing bacteria and germs from entering the surgical site during cat dental procedures to avoid infections.
Importance explained: Keeping the surgical area sterile helps reduce pain and speeds up healing after dental surgery in cats.
Scope of asepsis: It includes sterilizing tools, cleaning the cat’s mouth, and controlling the environment where surgery happens.
Common procedures: Tooth extractions, gum surgery, and oral tumor removals all require strict aseptic techniques in cats.

Understanding the basics of dental surgical asepsis helps pet owners appreciate the care involved in feline dental surgeries and the importance of following veterinary advice.

Why is dental surgical asepsis critical for cats?

Cats have sensitive oral tissues that can easily become infected if bacteria enter during surgery. Dental surgical asepsis protects against these infections, which can cause serious health issues beyond the mouth.

Infections can lead to pain, swelling, and systemic illness in cats. Maintaining asepsis also helps reduce the need for additional treatments and improves surgical success rates.

Infection prevention: Asepsis stops harmful bacteria from causing infections in the cat’s mouth after surgery, preventing complications.
Pain reduction: Avoiding infections reduces post-operative pain and discomfort for your cat, improving recovery quality.
Faster healing: A sterile surgical field promotes quicker tissue repair and less inflammation in feline dental surgeries.
Overall health protection: Preventing oral infections helps avoid spread to other organs, safeguarding your cat’s general health.

Dental surgical asepsis is a vital part of veterinary care that directly impacts your cat’s wellbeing and recovery after oral procedures.

How do veterinarians prepare cats for dental surgical asepsis?

Preparing a cat for dental surgery involves several steps to ensure the mouth and surrounding area are clean and ready. This preparation minimizes bacteria and contaminants before the procedure begins.

Veterinarians carefully examine the cat, clean the oral cavity, and use antiseptic rinses. They also ensure the cat is properly anesthetized to prevent movement and contamination during surgery.

Pre-surgical exam: Vets check the cat’s overall health and oral condition to plan safe and effective dental surgery.
Oral cleaning: Removing plaque and debris from the cat’s teeth reduces bacterial load before surgery starts.
Antiseptic rinses: Applying chlorhexidine or similar solutions in the mouth helps kill bacteria and disinfect the surgical site.
Anesthesia use: Proper sedation keeps the cat still, preventing contamination and allowing precise surgical work.

These preparation steps are essential to create a safe environment for dental surgery and protect your cat from infection risks.

What sterilization methods are used for dental instruments in cats?

Dental instruments must be sterile to prevent introducing bacteria into the cat’s mouth during surgery. Veterinary clinics use strict sterilization protocols to clean and disinfect tools.

Common methods include autoclaving, chemical sterilants, and ultrasonic cleaning. Each step ensures instruments are free of microbes before use.

Autoclaving process: Using high-pressure steam sterilizes dental tools effectively by killing all bacteria, viruses, and spores.
Chemical sterilants: Soaking instruments in approved disinfectants removes microbes when heat sterilization isn’t suitable.
Ultrasonic cleaning: Vibrations remove debris and biofilm from instruments before sterilization, enhancing cleanliness.
Packaging and storage: Sterilized tools are kept in sealed packaging to maintain sterility until the dental procedure.

Proper instrument sterilization is a cornerstone of dental surgical asepsis, ensuring no harmful germs enter the cat’s mouth during surgery.

How is the surgical environment controlled during feline dental surgery?

The surgical environment must remain clean and controlled to maintain asepsis throughout the dental procedure. This includes the surgical room, equipment, and personnel.

Veterinary teams follow strict hygiene protocols, wear sterile gloves and gowns, and use sterile drapes to isolate the surgical site. Air quality and surface cleanliness are also managed carefully.

Clean surgical room: The operating area is disinfected before and after each procedure to reduce environmental bacteria.
Sterile attire: Veterinarians and assistants wear gloves, masks, and gowns to prevent contamination of the surgical site.
Surgical draping: Sterile drapes cover the cat’s body except the mouth, isolating the area and reducing infection risk.
Air control: Some clinics use filtered air systems to minimize airborne microbes during dental surgery.

Maintaining a controlled environment helps keep the cat safe and supports the success of dental surgical asepsis protocols.

What post-operative care supports dental surgical asepsis in cats?

After dental surgery, proper care helps prevent infections and promotes healing. Owners play a key role in maintaining asepsis at home by following veterinary instructions carefully.

This includes monitoring the surgical site, managing pain, and preventing your cat from disturbing the area. Good oral hygiene and follow-up visits are also important.

Wound monitoring: Check the cat’s mouth daily for redness, swelling, or discharge that may indicate infection.
Pain management: Administer prescribed pain medications to keep your cat comfortable and reduce stress on healing tissues.
Preventing trauma: Use an Elizabethan collar if needed to stop your cat from licking or scratching the surgical site.
Follow-up visits: Return to the vet for rechecks to ensure the surgical site is healing properly and no infection is present.

Careful post-operative management supports the aseptic environment established during surgery and helps your cat recover fully and comfortably.

Conclusion

Dental surgical asepsis in cats is essential for preventing infections and ensuring successful oral surgeries. It involves careful preparation, sterilization, and environmental control by veterinary teams.

As a cat owner, understanding these steps helps you appreciate the care involved and follow post-operative instructions to support your cat’s healing. Maintaining asepsis protects your cat’s health and comfort during dental treatment.

FAQs

How long does dental surgical asepsis take in cats?

Preparation and sterilization steps usually take 30 to 60 minutes before surgery. The actual dental procedure time depends on the complexity but asepsis is maintained throughout.

Can dental surgical asepsis prevent all infections in cats?

While asepsis greatly reduces infection risk, some infections can still occur due to individual factors. Prompt veterinary care is important if signs of infection appear.

Is anesthesia safe for cats during dental surgery?

Yes, anesthesia is generally safe when administered by trained veterinarians who monitor your cat closely during the procedure.

How can I help maintain asepsis after my cat’s dental surgery?

Follow all veterinary instructions, keep the surgical site clean, prevent your cat from licking wounds, and attend follow-up appointments.

Are there risks if dental surgical asepsis is not followed?

Yes, poor asepsis can lead to infections, delayed healing, pain, and more serious health complications requiring additional treatment.

X min read

Asepsis During TPLO Surgery

TPLO is one of the most common surgical procedures in veterinary small animal practice. It is also one of the procedures with the highest reported SSI rates.

Published SSI rates for TPLO range from 0.8% to 14.3% in controlled cohort studies, with some reports citing complication rates as high as 28% including all post-operative issues. The procedure is classified as a clean surgery, meaning SSI rates should theoretically be at the lower end of the 1 to 5% range. That they frequently exceed this reflects the specific vulnerability this procedure creates.

What this covers: The TPLO-specific asepsis protocol, SSI risk factors unique to this procedure, intraoperative contamination management, the role of MRSP, and the evidence that stricter asepsis protocols reduce TPLO infection rates.Evidence base: 769-TPLO retrospective cohort (PMC10133455); DVM360 TPLO protocol improvement study (Stine et al., 703 dogs); PMC11946642 perioperative vs. extended antimicrobial study; intraoperative bacterial culture study (PMC11069177).Key clinical finding: Stine et al. (Vet Surg, 2018) demonstrated that implementing protocol changes to reduce implant-associated infection in TPLO produced a significantly lower IAI rate in the modified protocol period. The changes were predominantly asepsis-related, not antibiotic-related.

Key takeaways

TPLO SSI rates (0.8 to 14.3%) exceed expected rates for a clean surgical class.
MRSP colonization is an independent risk factor for TPLO SSI.
The oscillating saw generates bone debris that contaminates the surgical field.
Stricter asepsis protocols directly reduce TPLO implant-associated infection rates.
Full-limb prep from groin to paw is required for TPLO procedures.
Double gloving, strict OR traffic, and intraoperative lavage are standard for TPLO.
Extended post-operative antibiotics do not reduce SSI rates; perioperative only suffices.

Why TPLO has elevated SSI rates

TPLO is a clean surgical procedure in a healthy dog. By wound classification standards, SSI rates should be 1 to 5%. The documented rates of 7 to 14% (and higher in some series) reflect procedure-specific factors:

1. Implant presence

TPLO uses a locking tibial plate and screws. As with all implant procedures, the presence of foreign material dramatically lowers the minimum infective dose required to establish infection and provides a substrate for biofilm formation.

2. Oscillating saw contamination

The circular osteotomy requires an oscillating saw operating at high speed. This generates:

Aerosolized bone and marrow contents that settle on the sterile field
Localized thermal damage to bone and soft tissue that reduces local tissue viability
Blood and tissue debris that accumulates in the wound and surgical field

Saline irrigation during saw use reduces thermal damage and debris generation. Still, the amount of intraoperative contamination in TPLO exceeds most other clean procedures.

3. Prolonged procedure time

TPLO typically takes 90 minutes or more including arthrotomy, meniscal assessment, osteotomy, and plating. Longer procedures accumulate more contamination opportunities and place sustained demands on OR traffic and sterile field management.

4. MRSP colonization rate in stifle patients

Pre-operative MRSP carrier status has been identified as a significant independent risk factor for TPLO SSI in multiple cohort studies. The MRSP carrier rate in dogs undergoing stifle surgery may be higher than in the general canine population due to prior antibiotic exposure and skin disease that often co-exists with cruciate ligament disease.

5. Sparse soft tissue coverage of the proximal tibia

The medial proximal tibia has thin soft tissue coverage. This creates a challenging wound closure with limited tissue depth between the implant and the skin surface, shortening the distance bacteria must traverse to reach the implant.

The TPLO-specific asepsis protocol

Pre-operative preparation

Patient assessment:

Pre-operative MRSP screening is increasingly supported for TPLO candidates, particularly those with:

Prior history of skin infection, ear infection, or dermatitis
Prior antimicrobial treatment within the past three to six months
Previous SSI at any site
Known prior MRSP colonization

Clipping:

Clip the entire operated limb from the inguinal region to the distal tarsus. The entire limb clip allows full circumferential draping and access for skin prep to all surfaces that will be manipulated during hanging-limb preparation.

Skin antisepsis (hanging-limb method):

DVM360 documents the modified TPLO protocol at a North Carolina referral center that reduced IAI rates as including: "hanging-limb asepsis with alternating chlorhexidine gluconate solution and alcohol, followed by alternating chlorhexidine and sterile saline."

Standard approach:

Limb suspended in a sterile stockinette or loop
Three-pass minimum centrifugal scrub sequence: CHG scrub, alcohol, CHG solution
Full coverage of the entire clipped limb
Allow full evaporation before draping

Antimicrobial prophylaxis:

Cefazolin 22 mg/kg IV administered 30 to 60 minutes before incision. Repeated every 90 to 120 minutes intraoperatively for procedures exceeding that interval.

Published evidence (PMC11946642) confirms that perioperative antimicrobial administration alone (without post-operative extension) maintains acceptable SSI rates in TPLO. Extended post-operative antibiotic courses do not reduce SSI rates further and contribute to antimicrobial resistance.

Standard prophylaxis does not cover MRSP. Asepsis is the primary MRSP prevention strategy.

Intraoperative technique

Draping:

Circumferential draping of the limb using sterile stockinette and impervious drapes. The entire limb within the sterile field must be draped such that only the surgical site is exposed.

Double gloving:

Mandatory for all TPLO procedures. Bone work, wire handling, and plate manipulation create multiple glove perforation opportunities. The inner glove provides a second barrier that is typically maintained even when the outer glove is perforated.

OR traffic restriction:

TPLO procedures should have the strictest OR traffic protocol of any procedure in the practice. Pre-operative supply confirmation eliminates the most common reason for door openings during the case. No non-essential personnel should enter during the procedure.

Saw irrigation:

During the circular osteotomy, continuous or pulsed irrigation with sterile saline:

Reduces thermal damage to the osteotomy site
Reduces aerosolized bone debris contamination of the sterile field
Removes blood and tissue debris from the cut surface

Implant handling:

Plate and screws remain in sterile packaging until immediately before use
Transferred to the sterile field using sterile technique
Never contact non-sterile surfaces at any point
If any implant component is contaminated, it is replaced with a new sterile component

Intraoperative lavage before closure:

Copious saline lavage (minimum 500 mL) after plate application and before closure removes:

Bone debris from the osteotomy
Blood clots from the operative field
Free-floating bacteria accumulated during surgery

For TPLO specifically, where MRSP and biofilm-forming organisms are the primary SSI concern, antiseptic lavage before closure has been used to address residual contamination that saline alone does not eliminate. Non-antibiotic antiseptic lavage options targeting resistant organisms and biofilm have been used in this context.

For implant-specific asepsis during TPLO, including the full rationale for enhanced asepsis in implant procedures and the specific implant handling standards, that guide covers the implant asepsis context.

The intraoperative technique standards that govern the sterile field, double gloving execution, and instrument handling during TPLO are covered in the broader aseptic technique framework. For core aseptic technique applied in TPLO, including the sterile field rules, instrument passing protocol, and technique violation response framework that apply during all surgical procedures, that guide covers the intraoperative technique standard.

Evidence that stricter asepsis reduces TPLO SSI

The DVM360 report of the Stine et al. (Vet Surg, 2018) study at a North Carolina referral center compared 703 dogs and 811 TPLO procedures across two protocol periods:

Standard protocol period (2006 to 2008): baseline IAI rate
Modified protocol period (2011 to 2014): stricter asepsis protocol implemented

The modified protocol changes included enhanced skin preparation technique, stricter OR traffic management, and protocol standardization. The IAI rate in the modified protocol period was significantly lower than in the standard period.

This is direct evidence that asepsis protocol changes, not antibiotic changes, drive TPLO SSI rate improvement.

For MRSP prevention through TPLO asepsis, including why MRSP is the dominant SSI pathogen in TPLO cases and how asepsis-based prevention addresses this specifically, that guide covers the MRSP dimension.

Post-operative monitoring for TPLO patients

Monitoring schedule:

48 to 72 hour wound check
Suture/staple removal at 14 days
Radiographic recheck at 6 to 8 weeks for osteotomy healing assessment
Full weight-bearing assessment at 10 to 12 weeks

What to monitor:

Incision: redness, swelling, discharge, warmth
Systemic signs: fever, lethargy, reduced appetite
Limb use: sudden non-weight-bearing is the most common sign of deep implant infection

SSI window:

TPLO SSI can develop immediately post-operatively (intraoperative contamination) or weeks to months later (delayed biofilm maturation or hematogenous seeding). Any non-weight-bearing episode in the weeks following a resolved TPLO should prompt veterinary evaluation for late SSI.

For broader orthopedic surgery asepsis in dogs, including the full perioperative asepsis protocol for all canine orthopedic procedures and how TPLO-specific requirements fit within the broader orthopedic asepsis standard, that guide covers the full orthopedic context.

Frequently asked questions

Why is TPLO SSI rate higher than expected for a clean procedure?

Several TPLO-specific factors elevate SSI risk beyond the clean wound class baseline: implant presence reducing the minimum infective dose; oscillating saw contamination; prolonged procedure time; MRSP colonization prevalence in stifle patients; and the thin soft tissue coverage over the proximal tibial plate. These factors make TPLO one of the highest-SSI-risk clean procedures in veterinary surgery.

Does MRSP screening change the surgical plan for TPLO?

MRSP-positive dogs may benefit from targeted decolonization protocols before elective TPLO, enhanced intraoperative asepsis, and post-operative monitoring. For urgent or non-elective cases in MRSP-positive dogs, heightened intraoperative asepsis including antiseptic lavage is particularly important. Consult current veterinary dermatology guidelines for decolonization protocols.

Is post-operative antibiotic prophylaxis required after TPLO?

Current evidence does not support extended post-operative antibiotic prophylaxis for TPLO in dogs without specific risk factors. PMC11946642 found no SSI rate difference between perioperative-only and peri-plus-postoperative antimicrobial groups. Perioperative prophylaxis timed correctly, combined with strict asepsis, represents the evidence-based standard.

For surgical asepsis standards that provide the comprehensive perioperative asepsis framework within which TPLO-specific requirements operate, that guide covers the full five-domain surgical asepsis standard.

TPLO SSI rates are higher than they should be for a clean procedure, and published evidence confirms that stricter asepsis protocols reduce them. The intervention that drives improvement is not the antibiotic choice. It is the combination of correct skin preparation, strict OR traffic control, full-limb draping, implant handling discipline, and intraoperative lavage that constitutes enhanced TPLO asepsis.

Resources

The following sources were used as reference and background for this article:

NIH/PMC. Surgical site infection after 769 Tibial Plateau Leveling Osteotomies. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
DVM360. Improving Infection Rates After TPLO. dvm360.com
NIH/PMC. Comparison of SSI Rates in TPLO Using Perioperative vs. Extended Antimicrobial Prophylaxis. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
NIH/PMC. Clinical relevance of positive intraoperative bacterial culture in TPLO in dogs. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Veterinary Practice News. Old and New Thoughts on Infection Control. veterinarypracticenews.com

X min read

We'd love you to
Join Us!

Thank you! Your submission has been received!

Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Taking Great TPLO Radiographs

Click Below to Watch Live Video Demos

We'll send you a Free Wall Poster with all the steps

Now that you are a pro at TPLO rads

Let's take your infection control to the next level

Watch these videos!

Step #1

Getting Ready

Ensuring a clean surgical field starts with proper skin preparation. This video demonstrates the best practices for:

Shaving the patient – Achieving a close, even shave while minimizing skin irritation
The Dirty Scrub – The initial skin prep step to remove surface debris and reduce bacterial load before the sterile scrub.

Following these techniques helps reduce infection risk and improve surgical outcomes. Watch the video to see how it’s done effectively!

Step #2

Reduce Your Risks

Many surgeons are shocked to find out that their patients are not protected from biofilms and resistant bacteria when they use saline and post-op antibiotics.

That’s Where Simini Comes In.

‍Why leave these risks and unmanaged? Just apply Simini Protect Lavage for one minute. Biofilms and resistant bacteria can be removed, and you can reduce two significant sources of infection.

Protect Your Patients

Step #3

Take the Course

Preventing surgical infections is critical for patient safety and successful outcomes. This course covers:

Aseptic techniques – Best practices to maintain a sterile field.
Skin prep & draping – Proper methods to minimize contamination.
Antibiotic stewardship – When and how to use perioperative antibiotics effectively.

Stay up to date with the latest evidence-based protocols. Click the link to start learning and earn CE credits!

Things to know

Asepsis

5 min read

Skin Antisepsis Protocol for Dogs

Learn the complete skin antisepsis protocol for dogs to prevent infections during veterinary procedures safely and effectively.

Skin antisepsis is the step that bridges medical and surgical asepsis. It is the last contamination-reduction opportunity before the incision, and the most frequently incorrectly performed step in surgical site preparation.

A 2018 study in dogs (BMC Veterinary Research, PMC5852956) found that both chlorhexidine-alcohol and povidone-iodine protocols produced no bacterial growth in 70 to 74% of post-antisepsis samples. In the remaining 9% of cases, a significant bacterial reduction was not achieved, indicating possible resistance or incomplete technique.

What this covers: The complete skin antisepsis protocol for dogs undergoing surgical procedures, including clipping standards, agent selection, scrub technique, application count, contact time, and transition to draping.Scope: Applies to all dogs undergoing surgery involving skin incision. Some elements (agent selection, dilution) also apply to wound preparation and IV catheter site preparation.Evidence base: BMC Veterinary Research (2018) comparative study in 46 dogs; PMC6149254 comparative study of chlorhexidine + cetrimide vs. povidone-iodine in 15 dogs; vetnurse.au best practice protocol for veterinary surgical skin preparation.Key clinical point: Alcohol is the component of combined antiseptic preparations (CHG-alcohol, PVI-alcohol) that provides the majority of the immediate bactericidal effect. Chlorhexidine provides the residual activity. Understanding this separation clarifies why agent selection and combination matter.

Key takeaways

Clipping timing matters: Immediate pre-operative clipping (within minutes of surgery) consistently outperforms night-before clipping due to recolonization of the prepared site during the interval.
Clippers, not razors: Razor blades create micro-abrasions that increase bacterial colonization at the wound margin. Clippers are the current standard.
Centrifugal direction is not optional: Scrubbing toward the incision center after working away from it recontaminates the prepared site. Direction must be maintained throughout.
Contact time is frequently skipped: The antiseptic must remain in contact with the skin for the required duration to achieve its labeled kill claim. Immediate drying negates the antimicrobial action.
Alcohol in combination adds immediate efficacy: Pure chlorhexidine or povidone-iodine without alcohol has slower onset than the alcohol-containing combination. Alcohol-based combinations are increasingly preferred.
Chlorhexidine must not contact ears, eyes, or open peritoneal/pleural cavities at surgical concentrations: These are the primary safety constraints for canine skin antisepsis agent selection.

Step 1: Timing and patient preparation

Clip-to-incision interval

Immediate pre-operative clipping is the current standard. The rationale:

Shaved or clipped skin begins recolonizing within hours
Night-before clipping allows sufficient recolonization time to partially negate the antisepsis step
Micro-abrasions from clipping (particularly with razors) increase rapidly over the hours following hair removal
In the OR or immediately before patient transport to the OR is optimal

Hair removal: clippers, not razors

Razors are contraindicated for pre-surgical hair removal in dogs.

A 2019 study (AJVR, Messiaen et al.) evaluated colony-forming unit counts on dog skin after clipping with two clipper blade sizes. Blade selection affects the closeness of the clip and the degree of skin microtrauma. Regardless of blade size, clippers produced substantially less skin microtrauma than razors.

Clipping protocol:

Use clean, appropriately sized clipper blades
Clip in the direction of hair growth first, then against if needed for a close clip
Clip a generous margin around the anticipated incision: minimum 5 to 10 cm beyond the longest anticipated incision extent
Vacuum or remove clipped hair from the patient before moving to the prep area
Do not wet the site before clipping (increases skin trauma and introduces moisture that complicates antiseptic application)

Step 2: Gross cleaning (pre-prep wash)

If the skin is visibly soiled (mud, feces, blood), a gross cleaning step precedes antiseptic application:

Rinse the area with warm water
Apply a mild soap or surgical scrub solution; gentle cleaning to remove visible contamination
Rinse thoroughly with sterile water or saline
Pat dry with sterile gauze before proceeding to antiseptic application

Do not use the antiseptic scrub solution for gross cleaning. Reserve it for the antiseptic phase after gross contamination is removed.

Step 3: Antiseptic agent selection

Chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG)

Why it is generally preferred for canine skin antisepsis:

Broad spectrum against gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria, yeasts, and fungi
Excellent residual (persistent) activity: binds to skin proteins and continues killing after application
Better-tolerated on canine skin than povidone-iodine in studies showing higher contact dermatitis rates with PVI

Concentrations for surgical prep:

Use	Concentration
Standard surgical scrub	2 to 4% CHG scrub solution
Final antiseptic solution	0.5 to 2% CHG in 70% isopropyl alcohol
Wound irrigation (if used)	0.05% CHG (dilute from concentrate: 1 mL CHG 5% to 99 mL water)

Contraindications:

Ear canals and tympanic membrane: ototoxic
Open pleural or peritoneal cavities at surgical concentrations: tissue toxic
Eyes and corneal contact: irrigate immediately if accidental contact occurs

Povidone-iodine (PVI)

Broad spectrum including bacteria, fungi, viruses, and spores at active concentrations
Less residual activity than CHG (inactivated by blood and organic material)
Higher incidence of acute contact dermatitis in dogs compared to CHG in some studies
Remains the preferred agent for ophthalmic surgical preparation (safe for corneal contact at 0.5 to 5% diluted solution)

Alcohol combination

Adding 70% isopropyl or ethyl alcohol to either CHG or PVI preparation provides:

Rapid immediate bactericidal action (alcohol is fast-acting)
Enhancement of the companion antiseptic's efficacy at the skin surface

A systematic review and meta-analysis (PMC3434203) noted that outcomes from chlorhexidine-alcohol combinations are often attributed to CHG alone, when alcohol contributes substantially to the observed efficacy. The combination is clinically superior to either agent used alone.

For antisepsis as part of the broader asepsis framework, including how surgical skin antisepsis relates to instrument sterilization and aseptic technique in the perioperative infection control chain, that guide covers the conceptual framework.

Step 4: Antiseptic application technique

The centrifugal scrub

Direction: Start at the center of the incision site and work outward in expanding circles. Never reverse direction (working back toward the center after moving outward recontaminates the center).

Method:

Apply antiseptic scrub to sterile gauze
Begin at the intended incision center
Work in concentric circles outward to the clip margin
Discard the gauze and use a fresh piece for each application pass
Repeat for the required number of applications

Application count

Minimum standard: three complete application passes. Each pass uses a fresh piece of gauze and covers the full prep area from center outward.

Some protocols specify alternating scrub (CHG or PVI) and solution (alcohol), with the final step being the antiseptic solution rather than the scrub:

Alternating protocol:

Pass 1: CHG or PVI scrub (outward)
Pass 2: 70% alcohol (outward)
Pass 3: CHG or PVI scrub (outward)
Final: CHG-alcohol solution applied and allowed to dry

Contact time

The antiseptic must remain in contact with the skin surface for its required duration. Common error: patting dry immediately after application.

CHG scrub: minimum 2 minutes total contact time across the application sequence
PVI scrub: minimum 5 minutes total contact time (PVI has slower onset than CHG)
Final alcohol or CHG-alcohol solution: allow to fully evaporate before draping (fire risk from electrosurgery if alcohol has not fully evaporated)

Note from vetnurse.au: "When unsure, the rule of thumb is to leave the solutions on for at least 5 minutes and remember iodine needs longer than chlorhexidine."

Step 5: Transition to draping

Once the antiseptic prep is complete:

Confirm the prep site is fully dry (alcohol evaporated; no visible moisture)
Transfer the patient to the OR or final surgical position
A gowned, gloved scrub technician applies sterile drapes
Drapes are placed from the incision site outward; once placed, not repositioned
The draped site becomes part of the sterile field

Any contamination of the prepped site during patient transfer requires restarting the prep sequence.

The sterile draping step is the bridge between skin antisepsis and the intraoperative aseptic technique that governs the rest of the procedure. For antisepsis as part of aseptic technique, including how skin antisepsis integrates with gowning, gloving, sterile field establishment, and intraoperative technique in the full perioperative sequence, that guide covers the complete intraoperative framework.

Common preparation errors

Error	Consequence	Correction
Night-before clipping	Significant bacterial recolonization before antisepsis	Clip immediately pre-operatively
Razor use	Micro-abrasions increase colonization	Use clippers only
Reversed scrub direction	Center recontaminated after prep	Centrifugal direction only; discard gauze after each pass
Insufficient contact time	Antiseptic kill claim not achieved	Observe required contact time for agent used
Single-pass prep	Inadequate bacterial reduction	Minimum three application passes
Wrong agent for site	Ear/eye toxicity with CHG; poor residual with PVI	Match agent to anatomical location
Alcohol not dry before draping	Fire risk with electrosurgery	Confirm full evaporation before draping

For skin antisepsis within surgical asepsis, including where skin antisepsis fits within the five-domain surgical asepsis framework and how it relates to the other perioperative steps, that guide covers the full context.

Frequently asked questions

Is chlorhexidine or povidone-iodine better for dogs?

Both achieve good bacterial reduction (74% and 70% no-bacterial-growth post-prep respectively in the BMC 2018 canine study). CHG is generally preferred for most canine surgical sites due to its superior residual activity and lower incidence of contact dermatitis. PVI is specifically preferred for ophthalmic surgery sites. Combined CHG-alcohol or PVI-alcohol preparations outperform either agent alone.

How wide should the prep area be?

At minimum, the clip and prep should extend 5 to 10 cm beyond the longest anticipated incision in every direction. For orthopedic procedures with potential for incision extension or implant manipulation, err generously. The prep area cannot be extended intraoperatively without contaminating the surgical field.

Can we use povidone-iodine for wound irrigation?

Dilute PVI (0.1 to 1%) has been used for wound irrigation, but its efficacy is significantly reduced by blood and tissue fluid. Sterile saline is the standard baseline for wound irrigation. For procedures where contamination control at closure is a priority, antiseptic lavage agents specifically designed for intraoperative use may be appropriate.

Should we scrub in circles or lines?

Published evidence from a feline study (PMC11195503) comparing circular and linear scrub methods found no significant difference in bacterial reduction between the two methods. The critical variable is technique consistency and ensuring full coverage of the prep area rather than the specific motion pattern. Centrifugal direction (outward from incision) is the consistent requirement regardless of circular or linear motion.

For skin antisepsis in cats for comparison, including how feline-specific anatomical considerations and agent sensitivity constraints differ from the canine protocol, that guide covers the feline skin antisepsis protocol in detail.

Skin antisepsis is where asepsis meets antisepsis: the step where the patient's own bacterial flora is reduced before the sterile field is established over the preparation. Every error in this step, wrong direction, insufficient contact time, night-before clipping, compromises the starting condition that all subsequent aseptic technique is designed to protect. The protocol matters as much as the agents.

Resources

The following sources were used as reference and background for this article:

NIH/PMC. Skin asepsis protocols as a preventive measure of SSI in dogs: chlorhexidine-alcohol versus povidone-iodine. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
NIH/PMC. Comparative clinical effectiveness of chlorhexidine gluconate and povidone iodine for preventing SSI in dogs. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
NIH/PMC. The Forgotten Role of Alcohol: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Chlorhexidine in Skin Antisepsis. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
VetNurse.com.au. Surgical Skin Preparation: Best Practice Protocol for Veterinary Nurses. vetnurse.com.au
The Veterinary Nurse. Surgical site infections: preparation, technique and perioperative prevention. theveterinarynurse.com

Read Blog Post

Asepsis

5 min read

Isolation Protocols for Infectious Cats

Learn effective isolation protocols for infectious cats to prevent disease spread and protect your home and pets.

When a cat arrives at a veterinary clinic with a contagious disease or is suspected of having one isolation is the most important immediate action.

Every minute a contagious patient spends in the general population is an opportunity for transmission.

Isolation protocols protect other patients in the hospital, protect staff, and protect the community's cats whose owners have not yet vaccinated them against the pathogens circulating in the clinic.

Quick answer: Suspected infectious cats go directly to isolation on arrival. Isolation needs dedicated equipment, full PPE for all staff entering, daily disinfection, and airflow separation from general wards. FPV requires at least 14 days isolation; URI typically 3 to 7 days after clinical improvement.

Key takeaways

Move suspected infectious cats directly to isolation on arrival do not route them through reception or general wards
FPV requires at least 14 days isolation; the virus survives on surfaces for months and needs parvocidal disinfectants
Feline URI spreads via droplets up to 5 feet and via fomites (hands, clothing, equipment) standard contact precautions are required
Ringworm is zoonotic: staff handling ringworm-positive cats need full contact PPE; precautions extend to the home
Dedicated equipment (stethoscope, thermometer, food dishes, bedding) stays in the isolation room; shared equipment brings contamination in and out
Separate airflow from the general ward is recommended; if unavailable, keep the door closed and minimize ventilation exchange

Which diseases require cat isolation?

Feline panleukopenia (FPV)

The most serious feline infectious disease in hospital settings.

ASPCA Pro: "Cats with FPV must be moved to an isolation area separate from unaffected and unexposed populations of cats.

Skilled staff with clinical treatment experience and knowledge of biosecurity should be assigned to the isolation ward."

ASPCA Pro: "Cats under treatment should remain in isolation for at least 14 days."

FPV is transmitted through fecal-oral contact and contaminated fomites. The virus is extremely environmentally stable it can survive on surfaces for months.

Only specific disinfectants (accelerated hydrogen peroxide, bleach at appropriate dilution) are effective against parvovirus.

ASPCA Pro: "If isolation is not available, animals with panleukopenia should be removed from the facility for treatment or euthanized to curtail their suffering and minimize disease spread."

Feline upper respiratory infection (URI)

The most common feline contagious disease encountered in clinical settings.

ASPCA Pro: "Feline URI easily spreads in shelter environments via fomites including hands, scrub tops, stethoscopes, toys, and shoes.

Feline URI can also be transmitted by droplets over distances of 5 feet or less."

Causative agents include feline herpesvirus (FHV-1) and feline calicivirus (FCV). Both can be transmitted via fomites and direct contact.

Calicivirus can also cause virulent systemic disease (FCV-VSD) a more severe form with skin lesions that has been reported as a post-surgical complication.

Best Friends Animal Society protocol: "PPE/handling restrictions lifted after 3 days" of no clinical signs in mild URI cases. Moderate to severe cases require longer isolation.

Ringworm (dermatophytosis)

Ringworm is a fungal infection not a worm caused by Microsporum canis in most feline cases. It is highly contagious between cats, between cats and dogs, and between cats and humans.

Animal Urgent Care: "Ringworm spreads through direct contact as well as contaminated bedding, furniture, and grooming tools."

Ringworm is zoonotic.

Staff handling ringworm-positive cats must use full contact precautions and should be aware that environmental contamination is extensive spores shed from infected cats can survive in the environment for months.

UC Davis IDC Protocol: disinfection requires an accelerated hydrogen peroxide product or dilute bleach; many common disinfectants are ineffective against dermatophyte spores.

Feline leukemia virus (FeLV) and feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV)

FeLV spreads through close contact and bodily fluids; FIV primarily through bite wounds. These viruses are not environmentally stable and standard contact precautions (gloves, hand hygiene) are sufficient.

Full isolation is not required for FeLV/FIV-positive cats in most hospital settings, but they should not be housed with FeLV/FIV-negative cats. Separate housing or adequate physical separation is required.

Setting up the isolation space

PMC (Infection Control Programs): "Isolation areas for sick animals should be present and these should have separate airflow from areas that house healthy animals."

PMC: "Isolation rooms may be poorly visible and/or accessible and may not provide access to an oxygen source or be amenable to intensive monitoring."

Minimum requirements for a feline isolation room:

Separate from all general ward areas
Door kept closed at all times when the room is occupied
Separate ventilation where possible; if not, close the HVAC vent serving the room
Dedicated equipment that never leaves the room: stethoscope, thermometer, food and water dishes, bedding, litter box and scoop
Hand hygiene station immediately outside the room (or inside if space allows)
PPE supply stocked outside the door: gowns, gloves, shoe covers, and masks or face shields where respiratory transmission is possible
Biohazard waste disposal within or immediately adjacent to the room

PPE requirements by disease category

Disease	Gloves	Gown	Mask	Shoe covers
FPV (panleukopenia)	Yes	Yes	Not required	Yes
URI (herpes/calicivirus)	Yes	Yes	Yes (within 5 feet)	Yes
Ringworm	Yes	Yes	Not required	Yes
FeLV/FIV	Yes	Recommended	Not required	Optional

Animal Urgent Care identifies the core elements as: wearing PPE when handling infectious patients, minimizing exposure within the facility, and maintaining separate isolation rooms sanitized after every patient.

Staff and workflow protocols

Assign dedicated staff to the isolation room whenever possible. Staff who have handled an isolation patient should not return to the general ward without removing PPE, performing hand hygiene, and changing contaminated scrubs.

UC Davis IDC Protocol: "Within Hospital: Move patient directly to examination room or cage in isolation. Notify the infectious disease control personnel."

Handling sequence:

Put on full PPE before entering
Complete all care for the isolation patient
Remove PPE inside or immediately outside the room (remove gloves last)
Perform hand hygiene
Change contaminated scrubs before entering general ward

Visit isolation patients last in the daily ward round, not between general patients.

Disinfection and cleaning

PMC: "Cages should be cleaned and disinfected at least daily." For FPV and ringworm cases, more frequent cleaning may be required.

Disinfectant selection by pathogen:

Pathogen	Effective agents
FPV (parvovirus)	Accelerated hydrogen peroxide; 1:32 bleach (sodium hypochlorite)
Feline herpesvirus	Accelerated hydrogen peroxide; quaternary ammonium compounds
Feline calicivirus	Accelerated hydrogen peroxide; bleach; some oxidizing agents
Ringworm spores	Accelerated hydrogen peroxide; 1:10 bleach

Standard quaternary ammonium compounds (common hospital disinfectants) are NOT effective against parvovirus or ringworm spores. Choosing the correct disinfectant is critical.

Terminal cleaning after discharge: a thorough cleaning of all surfaces, including walls, floor, ceiling fixtures, and all equipment. For parvovirus and ringworm cases, this requires two full cleaning and disinfection cycles.

Isolation duration guidelines

Disease	Minimum isolation duration
FPV (panleukopenia)	14 days after resolution of clinical signs
URI (mild)	3 days after no clinical signs
URI (moderate/severe)	7 days after no clinical signs
Ringworm	Until two consecutive negative fungal cultures
FeLV/FIV	Ongoing; separated housing, not full isolation

ASPCA Pro (FPV): "Cats under treatment should remain in isolation for at least 14 days."

Best Friends protocol: "PPE/handling restrictions lifted after 3 days" for mild URI cases.

For isolation protocols for infectious dogs, see isolation protocols for infectious dogs. For the PPE selection guide that applies to isolation work, see PPE use and barrier protection in veterinary clinics.

Frequently asked questions

My cat has a suspected URI. Does it need to be in a separate room at the vet clinic?

Yes, ideally. Feline URI spreads via droplets and fomites within 5 feet.

Cats with respiratory signs should be examined in a dedicated room or a drape-separated exam space, not in an open area near other cats.

Can I visit my cat while it is in isolation?

Policies vary by clinic. Many hospitals allow owner visits with PPE and staff supervision. The visit is typically brief and conducted in the isolation room itself.

Ask your clinic what their isolation visiting policy is.

How long does FPV survive in the environment?

Parvovirus is extremely hardy. ASPCA Pro notes it can survive for extended periods on contaminated surfaces.

This is why terminal cleaning with a parvocidal disinfectant, not just standard cleaning, is essential after a confirmed FPV case.

Is feline calicivirus dangerous to staff?

Feline calicivirus does not infect humans. However, staff can transmit it to other cats via their hands, clothing, and equipment. Standard contact precautions protect other feline patients, not necessarily staff health.

My cat was diagnosed with ringworm. What precautions should I take at home?

Wear gloves when handling your cat and cleaning the litter box. Wash hands after contact. Avoid sharing bedding or brushes. Vacuum and disinfect regularly with a product effective against ringworm spores.

Does a confirmed FeLV or FIV-positive cat need to be in a separate isolation room?

Not usually. FeLV/FIV-positive cats need physical separation from negative cats, not a full isolation room. Standard contact precautions apply. Full isolation is reserved for acutely contagious diseases like FPV and URI.

Resources

ASPCA Pro. Feline Panleukopenia. aspcapro.org
ASPCA Pro. Feline Upper Respiratory Infection. aspcapro.org
PMC. Infection Control Programs for Dogs and Cats. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Animal Urgent Care. Isolation Protocols: A Necessary Safeguard for Common Infectious Diseases. animalurgentcare.vet
UC Davis. Small Animal Infectious Disease Control/Biosecurity Protocol. safety.vetmed.ucdavis.edu

Read Blog Post

Asepsis

5 min read

Asepsis for Spay and Neuter Surgery

Learn essential asepsis techniques for spay and neuter surgery to ensure safe, infection-free procedures for your pet.

Spay and neuter surgery is the highest-volume surgical category in small animal veterinary practice. In most practices, these procedures are performed multiple times daily. The combination of high volume, relatively short procedures, and the perception of routine can erode aseptic standards over time.

SSI rates after elective spay and neuter in healthy patients range from 1 to 5% when asepsis is correctly applied. Rates above this in a practice typically indicate systematic asepsis gaps rather than patient-level risk.

What this covers: The complete perioperative asepsis protocol for ovariohysterectomy and castration in dogs and cats, including pre-operative preparation, intraoperative technique, MRSP considerations, and antimicrobial stewardship alignment.Scope: Applies to elective spay/neuter in healthy patients, including high-volume clinic settings. Modified protocols for higher-risk patients (concurrent infection, retroviral disease, immunosuppression) are noted.Clinical relevance: High-volume procedures are the highest-risk settings for asepsis normalization: the gradual, unnoticed relaxation of standards that occurs when procedures feel routine. Checklists and periodic auditing counteract this risk.

Key takeaways

Clean wound class (elective, healthy patient): expected SSI rate 1 to 5% with correct asepsis.
MRSP is a risk even in spay/neuter patients; carrier rate in dogs is approximately 4.4%.
Asepsis normalization is a real risk in high-volume settings; checklists counteract it.
Antimicrobial prophylaxis is not routinely indicated for clean spay/neuter in healthy patients.
Immediate pre-operative clipping is required; night-before clipping increases SSI risk.
Post-operative licking is the most common cause of SSI in spay/neuter patients.

Wound classification and SSI risk

Elective spay and neuter in healthy patients is a Class I (clean) procedure:

No inflammation present
No body tracts entered under uncontrolled conditions
Elective, not urgent
Primary closure anticipated

Expected SSI rate for Class I procedures: 1 to 5% in veterinary patients.

SSI rates exceeding this in spay/neuter cases within a practice typically reflect:

Asepsis normalization (gradual reduction in compliance with high-volume procedures)
Licking access post-operatively
Patient-level risk factors (concurrent skin disease, MRSP colonization, immunosuppression)

Patient preparation

Clipping

Timing: Immediate pre-operative. Do not clip the night before. Recolonization of the clipped site begins within hours; night-before clipping allows sufficient time for significant bacterial reestablishment.

Area:

Dogs - ovariohysterectomy (midline):

Clip from mid-sternum to pubis
Lateral extension: bilateral, to mid-flank
Include ventral vulvar margin in the prep area

Dogs - castration:

Clip the scrotum and prepuce; extend anteriorly to the inguinal area
Clip below the planned scrotal incision site

Cats - ovariohysterectomy (flank approach):

Clip the relevant flank from last rib to hindlimb; generous dorsal and ventral margins
Note: flank approach is common in cats; midline also used

Cats - ovariohysterectomy (midline):

Clip from mid-sternum to pubis; lateral extension to flanks

Cats - castration:

Clip scrotum; extend into perineal region

Skin antisepsis

Standard three-pass centrifugal scrub sequence.

Agent: CHG-alcohol combination preferred for most spay/neuter sites. PVI for periocular or ear canal-adjacent sites.

Feline considerations: 2% CHG-alcohol combination appropriate. Confirm CHG does not contact ear canals. Post-operative E-collar to prevent licking and grooming of the CHG-treated area.

Application: Centrifugal direction throughout (incision center to periphery; never reversing). Minimum three passes with fresh gauze for each pass. Contact time observed (minimum 2 minutes for CHG-alcohol). Full evaporation before draping.

Surgical team preparation

Standard surgical hand antisepsis applies:

Full surgical scrub (minimum 3 minutes for first case of day) or validated ABHR application
Sterile gown and gloves
Surgical cap and mask

High-volume settings: Each case requires fresh surgical preparation. Using the same gown across multiple consecutive spay/neuter cases without resterilizing or replacing it does not meet the sterile technique standard and is a common asepsis normalization error.

Intraoperative asepsis

Sterile field maintenance

Standard sterile field principles apply:

Sterile drapes isolate the surgical site
Sterile instruments used throughout
Any instrument dropped or contacting a non-sterile surface is removed and replaced
Non-sterile personnel do not contact the sterile field

Draping for spay/neuter:

For abdominal spay (dogs and cats): four-corner draping or a single fenestrated drape. For scrotal castration in cats: towel draping around the scrotal region with the remainder of the perineum excluded.

Instruments

Spay/neuter instrument packs should be confirmed sterile (chemical indicator checked, pack integrity verified, expiry confirmed) before each use.

High-volume settings: Individual packs per patient. Sharing instruments between patients during a multi-case session, even with rinsing between patients, does not meet the sterilization standard.

Tissue handling

Gentle atraumatic tissue handling applies regardless of procedure perceived simplicity. Excessive tissue trauma increases local inflammatory response and devitalized tissue, elevating SSI risk.

For the intraoperative technique framework that governs sterile field maintenance, instrument handling, and break response during spay/neuter procedures:

For core aseptic technique for the procedure, including the intraoperative sterile field rules and instrument handling standards that apply during spay/neuter as for all surgical procedures, that guide covers the technique framework.

Spay and neuter are soft tissue procedures and share the same wound classification and risk stratification framework as other canine and feline soft tissue surgery. For soft tissue asepsis applied to spay/neuter, including the wound classification table, patient risk factors, prophylaxis decision framework, and GI-entry protocols that apply across all canine soft tissue procedures, that guide covers the full soft tissue asepsis context.

MRSP and spay/neuter

MRSP colonization is relevant to spay/neuter SSI risk as for all canine surgical procedures. The approximately 4.4% carrier rate in dogs means that approximately 1 in 22 spay/neuter patients may be MRSP-positive on skin.

Standard CHG-alcohol skin antisepsis significantly reduces surface MRSP load before incision. The BMC Veterinary Research (2018) study found no MRSP in post-antisepsis samples from dogs prepared with either CHG or PVI protocols, suggesting that correct antisepsis technique effectively addresses surface MRSP before surgery.

For MRSP-positive dogs identified pre-operatively, enhanced skin antisepsis, consideration of intraoperative lavage, and close post-operative monitoring are appropriate.

For preventing post-spay/neuter MRSP through asepsis, including the MRSP epidemiology relevant to spay/neuter patients and the asepsis-based prevention strategy, that guide covers MRSP prevention.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis for spay/neuter

Standard recommendation

Antimicrobial prophylaxis is not routinely indicated for elective spay/neuter in healthy dogs and cats classified as Class I (clean) wounds. Standard aseptic technique applied correctly maintains SSI rates within the expected 1 to 5% range without prophylaxis.

This position is consistent with:

Current veterinary antimicrobial stewardship guidelines
Human surgical infection prevention guidelines for clean procedures
The evidence that prophylaxis provides no significant SSI reduction in clean procedures in healthy patients

When prophylaxis is indicated

Prophylaxis is appropriate for:

Concurrent infection at another site (dental disease, skin infection, urinary infection)
Pyometra or other pre-existing reproductive tract infection (reclassifies wound from Class I)
Immunosuppression (retroviral disease in cats, hyperadrenocorticism in dogs)
Procedure duration anticipated to exceed 90 minutes significantly

When indicated: cefazolin IV within 60 minutes of incision; discontinued within 24 hours post-operatively.

For skin antisepsis before spay/neuter in dogs, including the detailed centrifugal scrub technique and agent selection for canine spay/neuter preparation, that guide covers the canine skin prep protocol.

Feline spay/neuter skin antisepsis follows the same centrifugal technique but requires attention to CHG dilution safety constraints and the risk of post-operative licking of residual antiseptic from accessible skin surfaces. The 2% CHG-alcohol combination is appropriate for cats at this concentration; higher concentrations should not be applied near ear canals or wound contact surfaces.

For skin antisepsis before spay/neuter in cats, including feline-specific agent constraints and dilution requirements for cat spay/neuter preparation, that guide covers the feline skin prep protocol.

Post-operative asepsis: licking prevention

Post-operative licking is the most common preventable cause of spay/neuter SSI.

E-collar requirements:

Must be fitted and applied before the patient recovers from anesthesia
Must extend 2 inches past the nose tip (shorter cones allow most cats and many dogs to access the wound)
Must be worn at all times until the veterinarian confirms adequate healing at the recheck

Recovery suit:

A well-fitted recovery suit can substitute for or supplement the E-collar for trunk and abdominal incisions. The suit must be confirmed to prevent access to the incision.

Owner education:

Owner compliance with E-collar use is frequently insufficient. Direct communication that even a single licking session can introduce enough bacteria to start an SSI, and that the risk is highest in the first 48 to 72 hours, improves compliance.

High-volume clinic asepsis considerations

High-volume spay/neuter clinics (shelters, voucher programs, MASH clinics) perform procedures at a pace that creates specific asepsis risks:

Time pressure and asepsis normalization:

When the same procedure is performed 10 to 20 times per day, steps that are perceived as not immediately consequential may be informally abbreviated. Common normalization examples:

Reducing scrub duration for subsequent cases
Reusing gowns across cases
Skipping the clipping timing protocol (clipping before the session, not immediately before each case)

These shortcuts individually may seem minor. Cumulatively, they produce SSI rates above the expected range.

Structure that counteracts normalization:

Written protocol for each procedure step
Designated case-start checklist
Periodic competency observation even for experienced high-volume teams

Frequently asked questions

Should all cats and dogs be tested for MRSP before spay/neuter?

Universal pre-operative MRSP screening for routine spay/neuter in healthy patients is not currently standard practice. Screening is most valuable for patients with known risk factors (prior MRSP positive, chronic skin disease, recent antibiotics). Correct skin antisepsis technique effectively addresses surface MRSP in most cases regardless of carrier status.

Is night-before clipping acceptable in high-volume settings to save time?

No. Night-before clipping is associated with higher SSI rates than immediate pre-operative clipping across all surgical categories and is not acceptable regardless of workflow pressures. The clip-to-incision interval should be as short as possible. Workflow scheduling should be adjusted to allow immediate pre-operative clipping, not the reverse.

Can spay/neuter instruments be cleaned and reused between patients in the same session without re-sterilization?

No. Between-patient instrument reuse without re-sterilization does not meet the sterile technique standard. Each patient requires fresh sterile instruments. In high-volume settings, sufficient instrument packs must be prepared in advance to cover all cases in a session.

Spay and neuter are the most frequently performed surgeries in veterinary practice. That frequency, not despite it, is the strongest argument for maintaining rigorous asepsis. The procedures that feel routine are the procedures where standards erode. The SSI in patient number 15 of the day is as consequential as the SSI in patient number one.

Resources

The following sources were used as reference and background for this article:

NIH/PMC. Skin asepsis protocols in dogs: chlorhexidine-alcohol versus povidone-iodine. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
ATDove. Surgical Site Infection. atdove.org
ASPCA Pro. Sterile Surgical Techniques. aspcapro.org
The Veterinary Nurse. Surgical site infections: preparation, technique and perioperative prevention. theveterinarynurse.com
Veterian Key. Principles of Surgical Asepsis. veteriankey.com

Read Blog Post

Autoclave Monitoring and Validation in Vet Practice

Asepsis

5 min read

Autoclave Monitoring and Validation in Vet Practice

Learn how autoclave monitoring and validation ensure safe sterilization in veterinary practices to protect pets and staff.

An autoclave that appears to be running correctly may still be failing to achieve sterilization. Mechanical displays show that a cycle ran. They do not confirm that the cycle killed everything it was supposed to kill.

This distinction is why monitoring and validation are not the same thing, and why biological indicator testing is not optional for any veterinary practice using an autoclave for surgical instrument sterilization.

What this covers: The three-level autoclave monitoring system (mechanical, chemical, biological), validation protocols, documentation requirements, monitoring schedules, and the response protocol for failed validation.Core distinction: Monitoring is continuous and occurs with every cycle. Validation is periodic and confirms the autoclave is reliably achieving functional sterility. Both are required components of a complete sterilization quality program.Clinical relevance: Dispomed (2026) notes that Class 5 chemical indicators can demonstrate that cycle parameters were reached but cannot confirm all microorganisms were killed. Biological indicators are the only method capable of validating sterilization effectiveness.

Key takeaways

Mechanical monitoring confirms a cycle ran; it does not confirm sterility.
Chemical indicators confirm exposure to sterilization conditions, not microbial kill.
Biological indicators are the only confirmation of functional sterilization efficacy.
Weekly biological indicator testing is the minimum for active surgical practices.
A failed biological indicator requires immediate autoclave removal from service.
Documentation of all monitoring results is a quality assurance and regulatory requirement.
Validation must be repeated after any autoclave service, repair, or relocation.

Why monitoring and validation are both required

Monitoring

Monitoring is the routine assessment of each sterilization cycle. It confirms that the autoclave ran a cycle and that certain measurable parameters were met.

Monitoring uses mechanical readouts and chemical indicators. Both are performed with every cycle.

Validation

Validation is the periodic confirmation that the autoclave is consistently achieving functional sterility: that is, actually killing microorganisms, including the most resistant bacterial spores.

Validation uses biological indicators. It is performed weekly as a minimum in active veterinary surgical practices and after any event that could affect autoclave performance.

The relationship: Monitoring shows the cycle happened correctly on the instruments. Validation confirms the autoclave can actually sterilize. Both are required because monitoring alone does not detect all failure modes.

Level 1: Mechanical monitoring

What it measures

Temperature, pressure, and time for each autoclave cycle, recorded by the autoclave's built-in sensors and displayed or printed as a cycle record.

What it confirms

The autoclave ran a cycle with parameters within the programmed range. Most modern autoclaves print a cycle record automatically. Older units require manual recording from gauges.

What it does not confirm

Whether the items inside the chamber actually reached the required conditions. Sensor placement typically reflects chamber conditions, not pack interior conditions. A correctly reading autoclave can still fail to sterilize an overloaded or incorrectly packed chamber.

Documentation requirements

All cycle records should be filed and retained. Minimum retention: one year. Review periodically for trends (cycles consistently short, temperature anomalies, pressure irregularities).

Level 2: Chemical indicators

Classes of chemical indicators

The ISO 11140 standard defines six classes of chemical indicator, progressively more demanding in what they confirm:

Class	Type	What it confirms
1	Process indicator	Pack was exposed to sterilization process (external indicator tape)
2	Specific use test (Bowie-Dick)	Steam penetration in pre-vacuum autoclaves
3	Single variable	Exposure to one defined parameter (temperature only)
4	Multi-variable	Exposure to two or more parameters
5	Integrating indicator	Correlates to sterilization performance across all critical parameters
6	Emulating indicator	Specific to defined cycle parameters; highest chemical confirmation

What Class 5 and 6 indicators can and cannot do

Class 5 integrating indicators are the closest chemical approximation to a sterility confirmation. They react to time, temperature, and steam, and their response correlates with G. stearothermophilus spore kill requirements.

However, as Dispomed (2026) states: "Class 5 indicators can demonstrate that certain cycle parameters were reached, but they cannot confirm that all microorganisms were killed." A positive Class 5 result means sterilization conditions were likely met. It does not guarantee sterility.

Biological indicators remain the only direct confirmation.

Practical protocol

External indicator (Class 1): On every pack; confirms the pack was in the autoclave
Internal indicator (minimum Class 4, preferably Class 5): Inside every pack; confirms the sterilizing agent penetrated the pack
Check the internal indicator result before placing any instrument on the sterile field
A failed internal indicator means the pack should not be used; investigate and reprocess

Level 3: Biological indicators (spore tests)

What they are

Biological indicators (BIs) contain a standardized population of Geobacillus stearothermophilus spores: the most heat-resistant organism relevant to steam sterilization. If the autoclave cycle kills these spores, it confirms the cycle achieved the required sterility standard.

Geobacillus stearothermophilus is inactivated by exposure to 121°C saturated steam for a minimum of 20 minutes, or equivalent conditions. A negative BI result (no growth after incubation) confirms the cycle met this standard.

Types of biological indicators

Spore vials (self-contained): Most common format in veterinary practice. After the autoclave cycle, the vial is activated and incubated at 57 to 60°C for 24 to 48 hours. A color change (or growth signal in electronic readers) indicates surviving spores.

Spore strips: Paper strips impregnated with spores, placed in a Challenge Pack Device (CPD) within the autoclave. Sent to a laboratory for incubation and reading, or read on-site if an incubator and growth medium are available.

Placement within the autoclave

Biological indicators should be placed in the most challenging position within the autoclave load: the geometric center of the load for gravity displacement autoclaves, or as specified by the manufacturer for pre-vacuum autoclaves. This is where steam penetration is hardest to achieve and where sterilization is most likely to fail if the cycle is not performing correctly.

Interpreting results

Result	Interpretation	Required action
Negative (no growth)	Cycle achieved functional sterility	File result; continue use
Positive (growth confirmed)	Sterilization failure	Remove all packs from use; take autoclave out of service; investigate
Inconclusive	Technical issue with indicator or incubation	Repeat test; do not use affected packs until confirmed negative

For sterilization protocol that autoclave validation supports, including the complete instrument reprocessing chain from cleaning through packaging, sterilization, and storage, that guide covers the full sterilization protocol.

Validated sterilization is the prerequisite that all subsequent asepsis depends upon. Without confirmed sterile instruments, correct aseptic technique in the OR has nothing valid to protect. For how sterilization supports surgical asepsis, including the five-domain surgical asepsis framework and where instrument sterilization fits within it, that guide covers the broader perioperative asepsis system that autoclave validation enables.

Monitoring and validation schedule

Activity	Frequency	Trigger events requiring immediate action
Mechanical monitoring (cycle records)	Every cycle	Temperature or pressure out of range
Chemical indicators (external)	Every pack, every cycle	Failed indicator: do not use pack
Chemical indicators (internal)	Every pack, every cycle	Failed indicator: investigate; reprocess
Biological indicator (spore test)	Weekly minimum	Positive result: autoclave out of service
Full validation	After installation, major repair, relocation, or annually	Any parameter change

Some regulatory frameworks and institutional guidelines specify more frequent biological indicator testing. Wayne State University IACUC requires biological indicator testing every 6 months at minimum for instruments used in survival surgery. The University of Illinois standard requires indicators for every re-sterilization cycle. In active veterinary surgical practices, weekly testing provides the best safety margin.

Autoclave validation: formal process

Formal validation goes beyond routine monitoring. It is a structured assessment of whether the autoclave consistently achieves the required sterility standard across variable load conditions.

Validation steps

Calibration: Confirm temperature sensors are calibrated and within tolerance
Empty chamber runs: Establish baseline cycle performance with no load
Challenging load runs: Run biological indicators placed in the most difficult positions within a full clinical load (worst-case configuration)
Documentation: Record all cycle parameters, indicator results, and pass/fail determinations
Review and sign-off: Results reviewed and documented by the responsible clinician or compliance officer

When validation must be repeated

After installation of a new or replacement autoclave
After any repair that affects the heating, pressure, or timing systems
After relocation of the autoclave
After any positive biological indicator result and subsequent repair
At minimum annually as a scheduled program component

For sterilization vs. asepsis relationship, including how validated sterilization supports the aseptic technique chain that follows it, that guide covers the relationship between sterilization and asepsis.

Responding to a positive biological indicator

A positive biological indicator is a patient safety event. The response must be immediate and documented.

Required steps:

Remove the autoclave from service immediately. Do not run further sterilization cycles until the cause is identified and resolved.
Quarantine all packs sterilized since the last successful biological indicator. These packs are considered potentially non-sterile regardless of chemical indicator results.
Do not use any instruments from quarantined packs in surgical procedures until the autoclave is repaired and re-validated with a negative result.
Investigate the cause. Common causes: overloading, incorrect pack density, maintenance failure, damaged door seal, water reservoir issue, timer or temperature sensor malfunction.
Repair and re-validate before returning to service. Run a new biological indicator after repair; the autoclave returns to service only on a confirmed negative result.
Flag all cases performed using instruments from the quarantine window for enhanced post-operative SSI monitoring.
Document the incident and all corrective actions. This documentation serves quality assurance and regulatory compliance purposes.

For quality control as a quality control measure, including how autoclave monitoring and validation fits within the broader surgical asepsis quality control framework, that guide covers the QC architecture.

Common autoclave monitoring errors

Error	Consequence	Prevention
External indicator only (no internal indicator)	Pack interior may not have reached sterilization conditions undetected	Use internal indicator in every pack
Chemical indicator not checked before use	Non-sterile pack used unknowingly	Mandatory indicator check before any pack is opened
Biological indicator run but not incubated correctly	False negative result; sterilization failure undetected	Follow manufacturer incubation protocol; use positive control vial
Biological indicator placed on top of load (not in challenging position)	May not reflect actual sterilization performance at pack interior	Place BI in geometric center or hardest-to-reach position
No documentation	Cannot demonstrate compliance; cannot identify trends	Log every cycle; file all indicator results

Frequently asked questions

How long does biological indicator incubation take?

Self-contained vial BIs typically require 24 to 48 hours of incubation at 57 to 60°C. Some rapid-readout BIs can return results in 1 to 3 hours using enzyme-based detection rather than growth. Rapid BIs are particularly useful when same-day turnaround is needed. Confirm the BI type and incubation protocol match the manufacturer's instructions.

Can we use chemical indicators instead of biological indicators to reduce cost?

No. Chemical indicators confirm exposure to sterilization conditions; biological indicators confirm that conditions achieved sterilization. These are different claims. The additional cost of weekly biological indicator testing is small relative to the patient safety consequence of an undetected sterilization failure.

What does a positive control vial confirm?

A positive control vial is an unsterilized vial from the same biological indicator lot, incubated alongside the test vial. If the positive control does not show growth, the test system may have a problem (inactive spores, incubation failure) and the negative result from the test vial cannot be trusted. Always include a positive control when running biological indicator tests.

How should autoclave monitoring records be stored?

In a designated log or binder at the autoclave location, filed chronologically. Digital records are acceptable if regularly backed up. Records should be retained for a minimum of one year; longer retention is appropriate for regulatory compliance documentation.

Autoclave monitoring tells the team what happened during a cycle. Validation confirms the autoclave can achieve what it is supposed to achieve. Both are required. Neither is optional. And the biological indicator is the only instrument in the monitoring system that actually confirms an organism was killed.

Resources

The following sources were used as reference and background for this article:

Dispomed. The Gold Standard of Sterilization: Why Biological Indicators Matter in Veterinary Practice. dispomed.com
Wayne State IACUC. Autoclave Monitoring and Sterile Pack Storage Standards. research.wayne.edu
University of Illinois DRS. Autoclave Waste and Validation. drs.illinois.edu
Tuttnauer. Spore Testing for Your Autoclave: Why, How and When. tuttnauer.com
Consteril. What Are Biological Indicators (Spore Tests)? consteril.com

Read Blog Post

Asepsis

5 min read

Asepsis During Soft Tissue Surgery in Cats

Learn essential asepsis techniques during soft tissue surgery in cats to prevent infections and ensure safe recovery.

Feline soft tissue surgery follows the same asepsis principles as canine soft tissue surgery but requires adjustments at several points. Cats differ physiologically, anatomically, and in their response to certain antiseptic agents. These differences are clinically significant.

What this covers: The perioperative asepsis protocol for soft tissue surgery in cats, including feline-specific patient preparation requirements, antiseptic agent constraints, wound class application to common feline procedures, intraoperative technique, and post-operative wound management.Scope: Applies to all cats undergoing soft tissue surgical procedures, from elective ovariohysterectomy to emergency GI surgery, abscess drainage, and urinary tract procedures.Key feline differences from dogs: Cats are more sensitive to chlorhexidine at high concentrations; cats self-groom and may ingest residual antiseptic post-operatively; feline skin is more delicate than canine skin; stress-related immune suppression is a clinically relevant factor in feline SSI risk.

Key takeaways

Core asepsis principles are identical to canine; the adjustments are agent-specific and anatomical.
CHG is safe for cats at correct dilutions; concentrated CHG on wounds or cavities is not.
Cats self-groom; any residual antiseptic on accessible skin creates ingestion risk.
Feline skin is more delicate; clipping pressure must be reduced to prevent abrasions.
Stress-related immunosuppression in cats can elevate SSI risk; minimize stress pre-operatively.
Ovariohysterectomy (OHH) is the highest-volume feline soft tissue procedure; asepsis is standard.
Post-operative wound protection (E-collar) is essential; cats can access more wound locations than dogs.

Feline-specific patient risk factors

In addition to the standard SSI risk factors (wound class, procedure duration, concurrent disease), cats present specific considerations:

Retroviral infection

FIV (feline immunodeficiency virus) and FeLV (feline leukemia virus) cause varying degrees of immunosuppression. Retroviral-positive cats undergoing surgery have potentially impaired wound immune defense.

Pre-operative retroviral status should be known before elective surgery. For retroviral-positive cats, enhanced post-operative monitoring is appropriate, and any elevation in wound class (unplanned contamination) warrants more aggressive management.

Stress and corticosteroid-driven immunosuppression

Cats under stress (hospitalization, handling, fear) produce elevated endogenous corticosteroids. Chronic corticosteroid elevation impairs neutrophil function and wound immune defense.

Minimizing pre-operative stress through:

Reduced hospitalization time before elective surgery
Feline-friendly handling protocols
Anxiolytic pre-medication where appropriate

contributes to SSI prevention through immune function preservation.

Urethral obstruction patients

Male cats presenting for perineal urethrostomy or cystotomy after urethral obstruction have often had urinary catheters in place and may have concurrent urinary tract infection. These patients should be classified as Class II or III depending on urine culture results, and therapeutic antimicrobials rather than prophylaxis may be indicated.

Pre-operative preparation: feline-specific protocol

Clipping

Feline skin is more delicate than canine skin. Clipper pressure must be reduced to prevent abrasions that could compromise skin barrier function.

For ovariohysterectomy:

Midline approach: clip from mid-sternum to pubis, with lateral extension to include bilateral flank
Flank approach: clip the relevant flank from last rib to hindlimb; generous dorsal and ventral margins

For other soft tissue procedures:

Clip area extends minimum 5 cm beyond anticipated incision in all directions
Use a fine blade appropriate for feline coat
Immediate pre-operative clipping; do not clip the night before

Skin antisepsis

Agent selection:

Chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) is appropriate for feline surgical skin antisepsis at the correct concentrations:

Surgical scrub: 2% CHG in 70% ethyl or isopropyl alcohol
Final solution: 2% CHG-alcohol combination applied and allowed to dry fully

CHG safety constraints for cats:

Do not use near ear canals: Ototoxic
Do not use concentrated CHG on wound or cavity contact surfaces: Tissue toxic at surgical concentrations
Wound irrigation if needed: 0.05% CHG maximum (1 mL CHG 5% to 99 mL sterile water)
Post-operative grooming risk: Residual CHG on accessible skin creates ingestion exposure; E-collar use post-operatively is particularly important

Povidone-iodine is appropriate for ophthalmic surgical preparation and as an alternative for general sites where CHG is contraindicated.

Application technique:

Three-pass minimum centrifugal scrub (incision center outward; never reversing direction). Contact time: minimum 2 minutes for CHG combinations, 5 minutes for PVI. Full evaporation before draping.

For skin antisepsis preparation for cats, including the complete feline skin antisepsis protocol with the evidence from the 2024 circular vs. linear scrub study, that guide covers the cat-specific preparation protocol in full detail.

Wound classification for common feline soft tissue procedures

Procedure	Class	Prophylaxis indication	Lavage
Ovariohysterectomy (intact)	I (Clean)	Not routine in healthy cat	Optional
Pyometra OHH (closed)	II (Clean-contaminated)	Yes	Yes
Pyometra OHH (open/ruptured)	III to IV	Therapeutic antibiotics	Copious
Intestinal resection (no spillage)	II	Yes	Yes
Intestinal resection (spillage)	III	Yes; culture	Copious
Cystotomy	II	Yes (culture-guided)	Yes
Perineal urethrostomy	II to III	Yes	Yes
Abscess drainage	IV	Case-dependent	Yes
Diaphragmatic hernia repair	I to II	Case-dependent	Yes

Intraoperative asepsis: feline considerations

Sterile field maintenance

Standard sterile field principles apply throughout. Feline patients are smaller than most dogs, which creates:

Smaller operative field requiring precise draping
Less dead space in most procedures, simplifying closure
Different scale instruments: fine tissue forceps, smaller needle drivers, and smaller sutures

These differences do not change the asepsis standard. Every principle of sterile field management applies regardless of patient size.

Tissue handling

Atraumatic tissue handling is particularly important in cats. Feline tissue, especially bowel, mesentery, and subcutaneous fat, is more fragile than the equivalent canine tissue. Excessive trauma increases devitalized tissue at the wound, which increases SSI risk.

Fine instruments, adequate lighting, and a planned approach to tissue layers reduce unnecessary trauma and support faster wound healing.

GI tract procedures in cats

Cats present with intestinal foreign bodies, intussusception, and intestinal lymphoma among other conditions requiring GI surgery. The same tract-isolation and glove-change protocols that apply in dogs apply in cats:

Isolate the intestinal segment with clamps or tapes before opening
Instrument change and double-glove change after bowel closure
Copious lavage before abdominal closure

Intestinal anastomosis in cats: The smaller feline intestinal lumen makes anastomosis technically more demanding. Reduced tissue handling requires sharp technique and fine instruments. Any spillage should be addressed with immediate copious lavage.

Pyometra surgery

Pyometra in cats requires surgical intervention in most cases. Uterine integrity determines wound class:

Intact (closed pyometra, no rupture): Class II; controlled tract entry under antibiotic coverage
Ruptured: Class III or IV; therapeutic antibiotics; copious lavage; drain placement may be indicated

Intraoperative culture of the uterine exudate guides post-operative antimicrobial selection.

For core aseptic technique, including the intraoperative sterile field maintenance, instrument handling, and personnel behavior standards that apply across all feline surgical procedures, that guide covers the intraoperative technique framework.

Post-operative wound protection in cats

E-collar or recovery suit use is mandatory after all feline surgical procedures where the cat can access the wound. Cats can access wounds that dogs cannot: notably the dorsal thorax, flank, and many proximal limb sites.

Why this matters more in cats than in some dogs:

Cats are persistent and motivated groomers
Cat tongues are barbed and more abrasive than dog tongues
Cats often access wounds that owners believe are inaccessible
The ingestion risk from residual antiseptic is eliminated by E-collar use

The E-collar should extend a minimum of 2 to 3 cm past the nose tip. Cats are particularly adept at working around shorter cones.

For asepsis during soft tissue surgery in dogs for comparison, including the canine soft tissue asepsis protocol with wound classification table and tract-specific considerations, that guide covers the canine equivalent in detail.

Frequently asked questions

Is the asepsis protocol for feline OHH different from canine spay?

The core protocol is the same: immediate pre-operative clipping, three-pass centrifugal antiseptic scrub, sterile gown and gloves, sterile draping, sterile instruments. The differences are agent-specific (CHG dilution requirements for cats) and anatomical (flank vs. midline approach options in cats). For a healthy young cat undergoing elective OHH, asepsis requirements are identical in principle to a dog.

Can CHG be used for wound irrigation in cats post-operatively?

Only at 0.05% concentration or below. Concentrated CHG is tissue-toxic. The 0.05% dilution (1 mL CHG 5% to 99 mL sterile water or saline) is within the safe range. Higher concentrations should not be applied to open wounds or body cavities in cats.

Should feline soft tissue cases be scheduled before or after canine cases?

Where possible, feline cases benefit from early scheduling in the surgical day to minimize stress from hospital sounds and smells. From an asepsis standpoint, scheduling contaminated cases (any species) last protects the OR environment for subsequent clean cases.

Is urinary catheterization pre- or intra-operatively relevant to SSI risk?

Yes. Pre-operative urethral catheterization carries SSI risk if performed without aseptic technique. Intra-operative catheterization (e.g., for cystotomy) should be performed using sterile catheter technique, and the catheter site should be kept out of the sterile field. Post-operative urinary catheters are a documented SSI risk factor in cats and should be removed as soon as clinically appropriate.

For surgical asepsis standards that provide the complete five-domain perioperative asepsis framework underlying these procedure-specific guidelines, that guide covers the full surgical asepsis standard.

Consistent execution of the feline soft tissue asepsis protocol requires recognizing which error categories are most likely in this specific clinical context, including CHG concentration errors, clipping micro-abrasion from excessive pressure, and insufficient E-collar use post-operatively.

For common errors specific to feline soft tissue procedures, including the error categories most frequently encountered in small animal surgery with particular relevance to feline cases, that guide covers the error taxonomy.

Feline soft tissue surgery demands the same asepsis standard as canine surgery, applied with awareness of the differences in agent sensitivity, tissue fragility, stress-related immune effects, and post-operative grooming behavior. Getting the CHG concentration right, using appropriately fine instruments, minimizing pre-operative stress, and enforcing E-collar use post-operatively are the feline-specific variables on top of the standard asepsis protocol that every cat patient undergoing soft tissue surgery deserves.

Resources

The following sources were used as reference and background for this article:

NIH/PMC. Incidence of SSI in dogs undergoing soft tissue surgery: risk factors and economic impact. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
NIH/PMC. Effectiveness of two scrub methods with different chlorhexidine combinations for surgical field antisepsis in cats. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
ATDove. Surgical Site Infection. atdove.org
The Veterinary Nurse. Surgical site infections: preparation, technique and perioperative prevention. theveterinarynurse.com
ABCD Cats and Vets. Guideline for Disinfectant Choice in Feline Veterinary Hospitals. abcdcatsvets.org

Read Blog Post

Asepsis

5 min read

Asepsis in Orthopedic Implant Surgery

Learn essential asepsis practices in orthopedic implant surgery to prevent infections and ensure successful outcomes.

What this covers: The specific asepsis requirements for orthopedic implant procedures in dogs and cats, why implants elevate SSI risk, the role of biofilm, MRSP considerations, and the components of an enhanced implant surgery asepsis protocol.Evidence base: TPLO SSI retrospective study (769 procedures; PMC10133455); DVM360 TPLO protocol improvement study; Veterinary Practice News MRSP and implant infection data; TPLO SSI rate review (PMC11946642).Key clinical fact: Bacteria commonly involved in veterinary SSI, particularly Staphylococcus species including MRSP, form biofilms on implant surfaces that prevent host immune response and antibiotic penetration. This makes prevention through asepsis more important than treatment after infection occurs.

Key takeaways

Implant surface provides bacteria a substrate for biofilm, bypassing host immunity.
MRSP-colonized dogs have a significantly elevated SSI risk for implant procedures.
TPLO SSI rates of 7 to 28% have been reported; stricter asepsis reduces this substantially.
Implant-associated infection usually requires implant removal for resolution.
Double gloving is recommended for all implant procedures.
OR traffic restriction is more critical for implant procedures than routine soft tissue surgery.
Intraoperative lavage before closure addresses contamination accumulated during the procedure.

Why implants change the asepsis standard

The implant-associated infection mechanism

All surgical procedures carry SSI risk. Implant procedures carry additional risk because the implant itself creates a favorable environment for bacterial colonization.

How this works:

During surgery, bacteria are introduced into the wound through any asepsis lapse
Bacteria adhere to the implant surface (metal plates, screws, pins) within minutes to hours
They begin producing a polysaccharide extracellular matrix: biofilm
Within the biofilm, bacteria are physically protected from host neutrophils and macrophages
Antibiotic molecules cannot penetrate the biofilm at clinically achievable concentrations
The infection persists indefinitely unless the implant is removed

Reported SSI rates for veterinary implant procedures

The highest-volume implant procedure in veterinary small animal surgery is the tibial plateau leveling osteotomy (TPLO) for cranial cruciate ligament repair.

Published SSI rates for TPLO:

Overall SSI rate 0.8 to 14.3% in most cohort studies (PMC11946642)
Some reports document rates of 19 to 28% including all complications (DVM360)
The Finnish MRSP outbreak further elevated institutional SSI rates during that period

A retrospective study of 769 TPLO procedures (PMC10133455) confirmed that MDR bacteria isolation correlated with development of major infections requiring additional surgical treatment.

The enhanced asepsis protocol for implant surgery

Standard surgical asepsis applies to all procedures. Implant surgery requires every component of that standard plus specific enhancements.

Pre-operative preparation enhancements

Surgical site preparation:

Immediate pre-operative clipping only (no night-before clipping)
Generous clip margins beyond anticipated incision
Minimum three-pass antiseptic scrub sequence
CHG-alcohol or PVI-alcohol combination for optimal immediate plus residual activity
Full contact time observed; site fully dry before draping

Pre-operative MRSP risk assessment:

Antimicrobial prophylaxis timing:

Note: Standard prophylaxis does not cover MRSP. Asepsis is the primary prevention for MRSP.

Intraoperative enhancements

Double gloving:

OR traffic restriction:

Specific traffic standards:

Only essential personnel present
OR door remains closed throughout the procedure
All required supplies confirmed in the OR before first incision
No personnel re-entry during the procedure unless clinically essential

Implant handling:

Implants remain in sterile packaging until immediate use
Implants are transferred to the sterile field using sterile technique
No implant contacts any non-sterile surface after removal from packaging
If an implant is inadvertently contaminated, it is replaced; contaminated implants are never "cleaned" and returned to the field

Intraoperative lavage:

Surgical wound lavage before closure is standard for implant procedures. Copious sterile saline lavage removes loose debris, blood clots, and free bacteria that accumulated during the procedure.

Post-operative considerations

E-collar or recovery suit: Essential. Licking the incision introduces oral bacteria including Staphylococcus species directly onto a wound with an underlying implant.

Activity restriction: Extended (typically 8 to 12 weeks for bone healing procedures). Physical activity stress can disrupt healing and may contribute to implant failure.

Environmental asepsis for implant procedures

The OR environment standard for implant procedures should meet or exceed the standard for general surgical procedures.

Specific environmental considerations:

Dedicated orthopedic surgical suite where available
OR surfaces cleaned and disinfected with terminal cleaning protocol before implant procedures
HEPA filtration confirmed functional
Positive pressure differential verified
Minimum OR personnel count enforced throughout

Instrument sterilization for implant procedures

All instruments used in implant procedures must be sterile. This includes:

Surgical instruments (standard pack)
Powered instruments (oscillating saw, drill): require sterilization of the handpiece or disposable sterile covers
Implant insertion instruments (holding forceps, screwdrivers, guides)
The implants themselves

Implant sterility:

Pre-sterilized implants should be:

Inspected for packaging integrity before use
Confirmed within expiry date
Opened onto the sterile field using sterile technique immediately before use

For implant instrument sterilization standards, including the full instrument reprocessing protocol applicable to orthopedic instruments, that guide covers the sterilization standards.

Frequently asked questions

What is the most common bacteria causing TPLO SSI?

Is lavage with saline sufficient for implant procedures?

How long after TPLO can SSI develop?

Should all TPLO patients be screened for MRSP?

Resources

The following sources were used as reference and background for this article:

NIH/PMC. Surgical site infection after 769 Tibial Plateau Leveling Osteotomies. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
DVM360. Improving Infection Rates After TPLO. dvm360.com
Veterinary Practice News. Old and New Thoughts on Infection Control. veterinarypracticenews.com
NIH/PMC. Comparison of SSI Rates in TPLO Using Perioperative vs. Peri- and Postoperative Antimicrobial Prophylaxis. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Read Blog Post

Asepsis

5 min read

Autoclave Monitoring and Validation in Vet Practice

Learn how autoclave monitoring and validation ensure safe sterilization in veterinary practices to protect pets and staff.

What this covers: The three-level autoclave monitoring system (mechanical, chemical, biological), validation protocols, documentation requirements, monitoring schedules, and the response protocol for failed validation.Core distinction: Monitoring is continuous and occurs with every cycle. Validation is periodic and confirms the autoclave is reliably achieving functional sterility. Both are required components of a complete sterilization quality program.Clinical relevance: Dispomed (2026) notes that Class 5 chemical indicators can demonstrate that cycle parameters were reached but cannot confirm all microorganisms were killed. Biological indicators are the only method capable of validating sterilization effectiveness.

Key takeaways

Mechanical monitoring confirms a cycle ran; it does not confirm sterility.
Chemical indicators confirm exposure to sterilization conditions, not microbial kill.
Biological indicators are the only confirmation of functional sterilization efficacy.
Weekly biological indicator testing is the minimum for active surgical practices.
A failed biological indicator requires immediate autoclave removal from service.
Documentation of all monitoring results is a quality assurance and regulatory requirement.
Validation must be repeated after any autoclave service, repair, or relocation.

Why monitoring and validation are both required

Monitoring

Monitoring is the routine assessment of each sterilization cycle. It confirms that the autoclave ran a cycle and that certain measurable parameters were met.

Monitoring uses mechanical readouts and chemical indicators. Both are performed with every cycle.

Validation

Validation is the periodic confirmation that the autoclave is consistently achieving functional sterility: that is, actually killing microorganisms, including the most resistant bacterial spores.

Validation uses biological indicators. It is performed weekly as a minimum in active veterinary surgical practices and after any event that could affect autoclave performance.

Level 1: Mechanical monitoring

What it measures

Temperature, pressure, and time for each autoclave cycle, recorded by the autoclave's built-in sensors and displayed or printed as a cycle record.

What it confirms

The autoclave ran a cycle with parameters within the programmed range. Most modern autoclaves print a cycle record automatically. Older units require manual recording from gauges.

What it does not confirm

Documentation requirements

All cycle records should be filed and retained. Minimum retention: one year. Review periodically for trends (cycles consistently short, temperature anomalies, pressure irregularities).

Level 2: Chemical indicators

Classes of chemical indicators

The ISO 11140 standard defines six classes of chemical indicator, progressively more demanding in what they confirm:

Class	Type	What it confirms
1	Process indicator	Pack was exposed to sterilization process (external indicator tape)
2	Specific use test (Bowie-Dick)	Steam penetration in pre-vacuum autoclaves
3	Single variable	Exposure to one defined parameter (temperature only)
4	Multi-variable	Exposure to two or more parameters
5	Integrating indicator	Correlates to sterilization performance across all critical parameters
6	Emulating indicator	Specific to defined cycle parameters; highest chemical confirmation

What Class 5 and 6 indicators can and cannot do

Biological indicators remain the only direct confirmation.

Practical protocol

External indicator (Class 1): On every pack; confirms the pack was in the autoclave
Internal indicator (minimum Class 4, preferably Class 5): Inside every pack; confirms the sterilizing agent penetrated the pack
Check the internal indicator result before placing any instrument on the sterile field
A failed internal indicator means the pack should not be used; investigate and reprocess

Level 3: Biological indicators (spore tests)

What they are

Types of biological indicators

Placement within the autoclave

Interpreting results

Result	Interpretation	Required action
Negative (no growth)	Cycle achieved functional sterility	File result; continue use
Positive (growth confirmed)	Sterilization failure	Remove all packs from use; take autoclave out of service; investigate
Inconclusive	Technical issue with indicator or incubation	Repeat test; do not use affected packs until confirmed negative

Monitoring and validation schedule

Activity	Frequency	Trigger events requiring immediate action
Mechanical monitoring (cycle records)	Every cycle	Temperature or pressure out of range
Chemical indicators (external)	Every pack, every cycle	Failed indicator: do not use pack
Chemical indicators (internal)	Every pack, every cycle	Failed indicator: investigate; reprocess
Biological indicator (spore test)	Weekly minimum	Positive result: autoclave out of service
Full validation	After installation, major repair, relocation, or annually	Any parameter change

Autoclave validation: formal process

Formal validation goes beyond routine monitoring. It is a structured assessment of whether the autoclave consistently achieves the required sterility standard across variable load conditions.

Validation steps

Calibration: Confirm temperature sensors are calibrated and within tolerance
Empty chamber runs: Establish baseline cycle performance with no load
Challenging load runs: Run biological indicators placed in the most difficult positions within a full clinical load (worst-case configuration)
Documentation: Record all cycle parameters, indicator results, and pass/fail determinations
Review and sign-off: Results reviewed and documented by the responsible clinician or compliance officer

When validation must be repeated

After installation of a new or replacement autoclave
After any repair that affects the heating, pressure, or timing systems
After relocation of the autoclave
After any positive biological indicator result and subsequent repair
At minimum annually as a scheduled program component

Responding to a positive biological indicator

A positive biological indicator is a patient safety event. The response must be immediate and documented.

Required steps:

Remove the autoclave from service immediately. Do not run further sterilization cycles until the cause is identified and resolved.
Quarantine all packs sterilized since the last successful biological indicator. These packs are considered potentially non-sterile regardless of chemical indicator results.
Do not use any instruments from quarantined packs in surgical procedures until the autoclave is repaired and re-validated with a negative result.
Investigate the cause. Common causes: overloading, incorrect pack density, maintenance failure, damaged door seal, water reservoir issue, timer or temperature sensor malfunction.
Repair and re-validate before returning to service. Run a new biological indicator after repair; the autoclave returns to service only on a confirmed negative result.
Flag all cases performed using instruments from the quarantine window for enhanced post-operative SSI monitoring.
Document the incident and all corrective actions. This documentation serves quality assurance and regulatory compliance purposes.

Common autoclave monitoring errors

Error	Consequence	Prevention
External indicator only (no internal indicator)	Pack interior may not have reached sterilization conditions undetected	Use internal indicator in every pack
Chemical indicator not checked before use	Non-sterile pack used unknowingly	Mandatory indicator check before any pack is opened
Biological indicator run but not incubated correctly	False negative result; sterilization failure undetected	Follow manufacturer incubation protocol; use positive control vial
Biological indicator placed on top of load (not in challenging position)	May not reflect actual sterilization performance at pack interior	Place BI in geometric center or hardest-to-reach position
No documentation	Cannot demonstrate compliance; cannot identify trends	Log every cycle; file all indicator results

Frequently asked questions

How long does biological indicator incubation take?

Can we use chemical indicators instead of biological indicators to reduce cost?

What does a positive control vial confirm?

How should autoclave monitoring records be stored?

Resources

The following sources were used as reference and background for this article:

Dispomed. The Gold Standard of Sterilization: Why Biological Indicators Matter in Veterinary Practice. dispomed.com
Wayne State IACUC. Autoclave Monitoring and Sterile Pack Storage Standards. research.wayne.edu
University of Illinois DRS. Autoclave Waste and Validation. drs.illinois.edu
Tuttnauer. Spore Testing for Your Autoclave: Why, How and When. tuttnauer.com
Consteril. What Are Biological Indicators (Spore Tests)? consteril.com

Read Blog Post

Asepsis

5 min read

Asepsis in Orthopedic Implant Surgery

Learn essential asepsis practices in orthopedic implant surgery to prevent infections and ensure successful outcomes.

What this covers: The specific asepsis requirements for orthopedic implant procedures in dogs and cats, why implants elevate SSI risk, the role of biofilm, MRSP considerations, and the components of an enhanced implant surgery asepsis protocol.Evidence base: TPLO SSI retrospective study (769 procedures; PMC10133455); DVM360 TPLO protocol improvement study; Veterinary Practice News MRSP and implant infection data; TPLO SSI rate review (PMC11946642).Key clinical fact: Bacteria commonly involved in veterinary SSI, particularly Staphylococcus species including MRSP, form biofilms on implant surfaces that prevent host immune response and antibiotic penetration. This makes prevention through asepsis more important than treatment after infection occurs.

Key takeaways

Implant surface provides bacteria a substrate for biofilm, bypassing host immunity.
MRSP-colonized dogs have a significantly elevated SSI risk for implant procedures.
TPLO SSI rates of 7 to 28% have been reported; stricter asepsis reduces this substantially.
Implant-associated infection usually requires implant removal for resolution.
Double gloving is recommended for all implant procedures.
OR traffic restriction is more critical for implant procedures than routine soft tissue surgery.
Intraoperative lavage before closure addresses contamination accumulated during the procedure.

Why implants change the asepsis standard

The implant-associated infection mechanism

All surgical procedures carry SSI risk. Implant procedures carry additional risk because the implant itself creates a favorable environment for bacterial colonization.

How this works:

During surgery, bacteria are introduced into the wound through any asepsis lapse
Bacteria adhere to the implant surface (metal plates, screws, pins) within minutes to hours
They begin producing a polysaccharide extracellular matrix: biofilm
Within the biofilm, bacteria are physically protected from host neutrophils and macrophages
Antibiotic molecules cannot penetrate the biofilm at clinically achievable concentrations
The infection persists indefinitely unless the implant is removed

Reported SSI rates for veterinary implant procedures

The highest-volume implant procedure in veterinary small animal surgery is the tibial plateau leveling osteotomy (TPLO) for cranial cruciate ligament repair.

Published SSI rates for TPLO:

Overall SSI rate 0.8 to 14.3% in most cohort studies (PMC11946642)
Some reports document rates of 19 to 28% including all complications (DVM360)
The Finnish MRSP outbreak further elevated institutional SSI rates during that period

A retrospective study of 769 TPLO procedures (PMC10133455) confirmed that MDR bacteria isolation correlated with development of major infections requiring additional surgical treatment.

The enhanced asepsis protocol for implant surgery

Standard surgical asepsis applies to all procedures. Implant surgery requires every component of that standard plus specific enhancements.

Pre-operative preparation enhancements

Surgical site preparation:

Immediate pre-operative clipping only (no night-before clipping)
Generous clip margins beyond anticipated incision
Minimum three-pass antiseptic scrub sequence
CHG-alcohol or PVI-alcohol combination for optimal immediate plus residual activity
Full contact time observed; site fully dry before draping

Pre-operative MRSP risk assessment:

Antimicrobial prophylaxis timing:

Note: Standard prophylaxis does not cover MRSP. Asepsis is the primary prevention for MRSP.

Intraoperative enhancements

Double gloving:

OR traffic restriction:

Specific traffic standards:

Only essential personnel present
OR door remains closed throughout the procedure
All required supplies confirmed in the OR before first incision
No personnel re-entry during the procedure unless clinically essential

Implant handling:

Implants remain in sterile packaging until immediate use
Implants are transferred to the sterile field using sterile technique
No implant contacts any non-sterile surface after removal from packaging
If an implant is inadvertently contaminated, it is replaced; contaminated implants are never "cleaned" and returned to the field

Intraoperative lavage:

Surgical wound lavage before closure is standard for implant procedures. Copious sterile saline lavage removes loose debris, blood clots, and free bacteria that accumulated during the procedure.

Post-operative considerations

E-collar or recovery suit: Essential. Licking the incision introduces oral bacteria including Staphylococcus species directly onto a wound with an underlying implant.

Activity restriction: Extended (typically 8 to 12 weeks for bone healing procedures). Physical activity stress can disrupt healing and may contribute to implant failure.

Environmental asepsis for implant procedures

The OR environment standard for implant procedures should meet or exceed the standard for general surgical procedures.

Specific environmental considerations:

Dedicated orthopedic surgical suite where available
OR surfaces cleaned and disinfected with terminal cleaning protocol before implant procedures
HEPA filtration confirmed functional
Positive pressure differential verified
Minimum OR personnel count enforced throughout

Instrument sterilization for implant procedures

All instruments used in implant procedures must be sterile. This includes:

Surgical instruments (standard pack)
Powered instruments (oscillating saw, drill): require sterilization of the handpiece or disposable sterile covers
Implant insertion instruments (holding forceps, screwdrivers, guides)
The implants themselves

Implant sterility:

Pre-sterilized implants should be:

Inspected for packaging integrity before use
Confirmed within expiry date
Opened onto the sterile field using sterile technique immediately before use

For implant instrument sterilization standards, including the full instrument reprocessing protocol applicable to orthopedic instruments, that guide covers the sterilization standards.

Frequently asked questions

What is the most common bacteria causing TPLO SSI?

Is lavage with saline sufficient for implant procedures?

How long after TPLO can SSI develop?

Should all TPLO patients be screened for MRSP?

Resources

The following sources were used as reference and background for this article:

NIH/PMC. Surgical site infection after 769 Tibial Plateau Leveling Osteotomies. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
DVM360. Improving Infection Rates After TPLO. dvm360.com
Veterinary Practice News. Old and New Thoughts on Infection Control. veterinarypracticenews.com
NIH/PMC. Comparison of SSI Rates in TPLO Using Perioperative vs. Peri- and Postoperative Antimicrobial Prophylaxis. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Read Blog Post

Asepsis

5 min read

History and Evolution of Asepsis in Veterinary Surgery

Explore the history and evolution of asepsis in veterinary surgery, from early practices to modern sterile techniques.

The history of asepsis is the history of surgery itself becoming reliably survivable.

Before the mid-19th century, post-operative infection killed more surgical patients than the original condition. The transformation from that reality to modern veterinary surgical asepsis spans roughly 150 years and four conceptual revolutions: germ theory, antisepsis, asepsis, and the modern antibiotic resistance era.

What this covers: The key figures, discoveries, and conceptual shifts that produced modern asepsis in veterinary surgery, from Pasteur and Semmelweis through Lister, Koch, Bergmann, and Halsted to contemporary infection control practice.Why history matters for practice: Understanding why each component of modern asepsis exists clarifies which steps are foundational and why they cannot be shortened or skipped. The rationale behind centrifugal scrub direction, closed gloving technique, and biological indicator testing becomes clearer when you understand what problem each innovation was designed to solve.Veterinary context: Veterinary surgery adopted human surgical innovations progressively across the late 19th and 20th centuries. The modern veterinary surgical asepsis standard reflects the same intellectual lineage as human surgery, adapted for animal patients and veterinary clinical settings.

Key takeaways

Pre-aseptic surgery was routinely lethal; most deaths were from post-operative infection.
Pasteur's germ theory (1860s) provided the scientific foundation for infection control.
Lister's antisepsis (1865) was the first clinical application: carbolic acid on wounds.
Koch's 1878 discovery shifted focus from air to contact as the primary transmission route.
Von Bergmann introduced steam sterilization of instruments in 1885.
Halsted introduced rubber surgical gloves in 1890, completing the sterile operative team.
Antibiotic resistance has renewed the clinical importance of asepsis in the modern era.

The pre-antiseptic era: surgery as last resort

Before the 1860s, surgery carried an infection mortality rate so high that it was performed only when death without surgery was certain. Even then, post-operative wound sepsis killed the majority of patients who survived the procedure itself.

The prevailing explanation was miasma theory: that disease was caused by "bad air" from rotting organic matter. Sanitary measures focused on ventilation and removal of waste, not on hand hygiene or instrument cleanliness.

Surgeons wore street clothes to operate. Instruments were rinsed between uses at best. Surgical wounds were dressed with materials that were not sterile. Infection was considered an inevitable consequence of surgery rather than a preventable complication.

The mortality statistics from this era were devastating:

Amputation mortality in some hospital settings exceeded 40%
Compound fractures treated surgically had mortality rates above 60%
Abdominal surgery was almost uniformly fatal from peritonitis

The germ theory foundation: Pasteur and Semmelweis

Louis Pasteur (1857 to 1863)

Pasteur's fermentation and putrefaction experiments demonstrated that microbial contamination from the environment caused organic material to decompose. His work disproved spontaneous generation and established that disease and tissue breakdown were caused by living microorganisms.

Pasteur did not directly apply this to surgery, but his evidence provided the theoretical foundation that Lister would use a few years later.

Ignaz Semmelweis (1847)

Working independently of germ theory, Hungarian surgeon Ignaz Semmelweis observed that puerperal fever mortality on maternity wards was dramatically higher in wards attended by doctors who also performed autopsies. He introduced mandatory handwashing with chlorinated lime solution for all staff before patient contact.

Mortality rates in his ward dropped sharply. Despite the data, Semmelweis's findings were rejected by most of the medical establishment.

Semmelweis is now recognized as having identified contact transmission of infection and the role of hand hygiene in prevention, decades before germ theory provided the explanation.

Lister and antisepsis (1865 to 1890)

Joseph Lister, a British surgeon working in Glasgow and Edinburgh, read Pasteur's work and concluded that wound infection resulted from microbial contamination from the air and from contact with instruments, dressings, and hands.

In 1865, Lister began applying carbolic acid (phenol) to wounds, dressings, and instruments during operations, and spraying it into the OR air to reduce airborne contamination.

His results were striking. In a 1867 paper, Lister reported a dramatic reduction in post-operative gangrene and mortality in compound fracture patients treated with carbolic acid.

Lister's antiseptic system included:

Carbolic acid applied to the wound and surrounding area
Instruments soaked in carbolic solution before use
Dressings impregnated with carbolic acid
A carbolic spray dispersed into the OR air during surgery (introduced 1870)

Antisepsis spread rapidly through European and American surgery in the 1870s. The principle was revolutionary: infection is caused by living organisms that can be killed chemically.

The limitation: Carbolic acid was toxic to tissue, irritating to skin, and ultimately harmful to wound healing. It was a treatment for contamination, not a prevention of it.

Koch and the shift to asepsis (1878 to 1885)

German bacteriologist Robert Koch's 1878 work on wound infections made a critical observation: most infection-causing microbes were not primarily airborne. They were transmitted through contact, from contaminated surfaces, hands, and instruments, to the wound.

This shifted the theoretical basis of infection control from treating contamination (antisepsis) to preventing it (asepsis). If bacteria were being transferred by contact, the solution was to eliminate the contact, not to kill bacteria after they had arrived.

The conceptual shift from antisepsis to asepsis produced new priorities:

Sterilize instruments before contact rather than treating them during surgery
Create a contamination-free environment rather than neutralizing contamination as it occurred
Prevent, rather than treat

Steam sterilization and the aseptic OR (1880s)

Charles Chamberland (1881)

French microbiologist Charles Chamberland invented the steam sterilizer in 1881, initially for laboratory use. The autoclave heated water to produce pressurized steam at temperatures sufficient to kill all microorganisms including resistant spores.

The autoclave was the technical implementation of Koch's contact-transmission insight: instead of chemically treating instruments, sterilize them completely before any contact with the patient.

Ernst von Bergmann (1885)

German surgeon Ernst von Bergmann was the first to systematically apply steam sterilization to surgical instruments and wound dressings in a clinical surgical setting, beginning in 1885. He is credited with establishing sterilization and aseptic methods as the operating room standard.

Von Bergmann's OR staff wore sterile gowns and caps. Instruments were sterilized in the autoclave before procedures. Easy-to-clean OR surfaces were regularly disinfected. This is the template for the modern surgical environment.

Gustav Neuber (1880s)

German surgeon Gustav Neuber, working contemporaneously with von Bergmann, is sometimes credited as the first to establish a genuinely aseptic operating room environment, with sterilized instruments, gowns, caps, shoe covers, and regularly disinfected walls and floors.

The combination of these innovations, autoclave sterilization, aseptic technique, and controlled OR environment, produced the framework still in use today.

Surgical gloves: Halsted (1890)

American surgeon William Stewart Halsted introduced rubber surgical gloves to operative practice at Johns Hopkins Hospital in 1890. The initial purpose was to protect the scrub nurse's skin from the persistent antiseptic solutions that were irritating her hands.

The infection prevention benefit of gloves was recognized subsequently: they provided a sterile barrier between the surgeon's hands and the wound, preventing the transmission of hand flora into the operative field.

Halsted also contributed to the principles of atraumatic surgery, emphasizing gentle tissue handling, hemostasis, and minimal dissection as factors in infection resistance.

The 20th century: refinement and antibiotics

The early 20th century saw progressive refinement of aseptic technique:

Standardization of autoclave parameters and validation
Development of synthetic surgical draping and gowning materials
Refinement of antiseptic agents for skin preparation
Introduction of HEPA filtration and positive-pressure OR ventilation
Formalization of surgical hand scrub protocols

The 1940s discovery of penicillin and subsequent antibiotics created a belief in some quarters that asepsis was less important: infections that occurred could simply be treated. Post-operative SSI rates in some settings increased during periods of antibiotic optimism when aseptic standards were relaxed.

The rise of MRSA in the 1980s and MRSP in veterinary surgery more recently has reversed that assumption decisively. Infections caused by resistant organisms cannot be treated with standard first-line antibiotics. The infection that cannot be treated reliably must be prevented.

The modern era: antimicrobial resistance and asepsis renewal

The current veterinary surgical asepsis standard reflects a renewed understanding that asepsis is not a backup to antibiotics: it is the primary defense.

The modern position:

Antimicrobial prophylaxis is an adjunct to asepsis, not a substitute for it
MRSP, MRSA, and MDR gram-negative pathogens in veterinary surgical wounds cannot be reliably treated when they occur; they must be prevented
Non-antibiotic intraoperative interventions (antiseptic lavage, aseptic technique) align with stewardship frameworks that prioritize reducing antibiotic use
SSI surveillance and quality control programs provide the data infrastructure that 19th-century surgeons did not have, allowing modern practices to measure and improve outcomes systematically

For current surgical asepsis standards, including the complete five-domain framework that represents the modern synthesis of 150 years of asepsis development, that guide covers the contemporary standard in detail.

Key figures and contributions: timeline

Year	Figure	Contribution
1847	Ignaz Semmelweis	Hand hygiene; contact transmission of puerperal fever
1857 to 1863	Louis Pasteur	Germ theory; microbial basis of infection
1865	Joseph Lister	Antisepsis; carbolic acid for wound and instrument treatment
1878	Robert Koch	Contact transmission as primary infection route
1881	Charles Chamberland	Invention of the steam sterilizer (autoclave)
1885	Ernst von Bergmann	First aseptic OR; steam sterilization of surgical instruments
1880s	Gustav Neuber	Aseptic OR environment; sterilized gowns, caps, instruments
1890	William Halsted	Rubber surgical gloves; atraumatic surgical technique
1940s	Fleming et al.	Antibiotics (penicillin); changed relationship between asepsis and treatment
1980s+	Multiple	MRSA emergence; renewed importance of asepsis over antibiotic reliance
2000s+	Veterinary community	MRSP in veterinary surgery; SSI consensus definitions; asepsis quality programs

For the distinction that emerged historically between medical and surgical asepsis, including how the different standards for OR sterile technique and clinical area clean technique developed from the same historical foundation, that guide covers the modern distinction.

The refinement from Bergmann's 1885 aseptic OR to today's practice added quality control infrastructure that the 19th-century pioneers did not have: biological indicator validation, SSI surveillance programs, and auditing frameworks. The principles were established then; the measurement and verification tools came later.

For modern aseptic technique that evolved from this history, including the specific intraoperative protocols that are the direct descendants of Halsted's technique principles and Bergmann's sterile OR concept, that guide connects historical foundation to current practice.

Frequently asked questions

Why did Lister abandon carbolic acid if it worked?

Lister abandoned carbolic acid around 1890, following Koch's work demonstrating that contact transmission was more important than airborne infection, and that heat sterilization was more effective than chemical treatment for instruments. The shift from antisepsis to asepsis meant that the goal became prevention of contamination rather than chemical treatment after it occurred. Carbolic acid was also toxic to tissue and surgical staff alike, making it a poor foundation for a sterile technique system.

Who invented surgical gloves?

William Halsted at Johns Hopkins Hospital is conventionally credited with introducing rubber surgical gloves in 1890, initially to protect the scrub nurse's hands from antiseptic solutions. The infection prevention benefit was subsequently recognized. Jan Mikulicz-Radecki, a Polish surgeon, also independently used surgical gloves around the same period.

When did veterinary surgery adopt aseptic technique?

Veterinary surgery adopted the principles of antisepsis and asepsis progressively in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, following the human surgical model. The formalization of veterinary surgical standards, including specific protocols for small animal surgery, occurred primarily in the mid-to-late 20th century as veterinary medicine professionalized and specialization emerged.

Is modern asepsis significantly different from Bergmann's 1885 model?

The core principles are the same: sterilize instruments, create a sterile field, use barriers between personnel and the wound, and control the OR environment. What has changed is the validation of each step (autoclave biological indicators, HEPA filtration standards, SSI surveillance), the materials (synthetic gowns, modern gloves, chlorhexidine antiseptics), and the formal quality control framework. The conceptual model Bergmann established has proven durable for over 140 years.

The history of asepsis is not primarily a story of inventions. It is a story of changing what the goal was: from tolerating infection as inevitable to preventing it as achievable. Every piece of the modern asepsis system, the autoclave, the sterile gown, the surgical scrub, the HEPA filter, the biological indicator, exists because a specific person saw a specific problem and proposed a specific solution. Understanding that history makes the protocols they produced harder to dismiss.

Resources

The following sources were used as reference and background for this article:

Encyclopedia.com. Antiseptic and Aseptic Techniques Are Developed. encyclopedia.com
News Medical. History of Asepsis. news-medical.net
Science Museum Group. Joseph Lister's Antisepsis System. sciencemuseum.org.uk
Encyclopedia.com. Antisepsis and Sterilization. encyclopedia.com
NIH/PMC. Antisepsis and Asepsis (1915 historical text). ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
IntechOpen. Implementing Good Practice in Aseptic Technique for Surgery in Laboratory Animals. intechopen.com

Read Blog Post

Asepsis

5 min read

Asepsis vs Sterilization in Veterinary Clinics

Learn the key differences between asepsis and sterilization in veterinary clinics to ensure your pet's safety during treatment.

Sterilization and asepsis are related but distinct disciplines. Sterilization is a process applied to instruments and materials before a procedure. Asepsis is the ongoing system of practices that protect the sterility of those materials throughout the procedure.

Sterilization is the foundation. Asepsis is the discipline that preserves what sterilization achieved.

What this covers: The formal definitions of asepsis and sterilization, how sterilization supports the aseptic system, the sterilization methods used in veterinary practice, validation requirements, and the relationship between the two in clinical infection control.Core distinction: Sterilization achieves a state: the complete elimination of all microorganisms and spores from an object. Asepsis maintains a state: the prevention of contamination from entering the operative field or patient.Clinical relevance: Sterilization failure is the highest-consequence single point of failure in surgical asepsis. A contaminated instrument delivered via perfect aseptic technique still introduces bacteria directly into the wound. Validating sterilization efficacy is therefore not optional: it is the most critical quality control step in the instrument cycle.

Key takeaways

Sterilization destroys all microorganisms including spores; disinfection does not: This is the critical distinction between sterilization and lower-level microbial control methods.
Asepsis depends on sterilization as its starting point: Aseptic technique manages sterile items to prevent re-contamination. If those items were not sterile to begin with, aseptic technique has no valid starting point.
Chemical indicators confirm exposure, not sterility: A darkened chemical indicator on an instrument pack confirms the pack was exposed to a sterilization cycle. It does not confirm that cycle achieved sterility. Only biological indicators confirm functional sterility.
Biological indicator testing must be performed regularly: Weekly biological indicator tests are the minimum for active veterinary surgical practices. Any failed test requires removal of all potentially affected packs from use.
Sterilization methods are not interchangeable: Autoclave (steam sterilization), dry heat, ethylene oxide, and chemical sterilization each have different indications and limitations. Selecting the wrong method for an instrument type risks either sterilization failure or instrument damage.
Aseptic technique preserves what sterilization achieved: A sterile pack that is opened incorrectly, stored past its expiry date, or handled with non-sterile technique is no longer sterile regardless of the quality of the sterilization cycle it underwent.

Formal definitions

Sterilization

The complete destruction of all microorganisms, including bacterial spores, on an object or material.

Veterian Key defines sterilization as "the destruction of all microorganisms (bacteria, viruses, spores) on an item."

Sterilization achieves an absolute outcome: zero viable microorganisms. This distinguishes it from disinfection, which reduces but does not eliminate all microbial life, and from antisepsis, which reduces microbial load on living tissue.

Sterility assurance level (SAL): In practice, sterilization is described probabilistically. A SAL of 10^-6 means there is a 1 in 1,000,000 probability that any viable microorganism remains after the process. Validated sterilization methods are designed to achieve this standard.

Asepsis

The prevention of contamination of sterile environments, tissues, or materials by pathogenic microorganisms.

Asepsis is not a single action but a system: the combination of sterile technique, physical barriers, environmental controls, and behavioral protocols that maintain contamination-free conditions from the moment of instrument sterilization through wound closure.

The relationship: sterilization creates a sterile item; asepsis keeps it sterile until it reaches the patient.

Sterilization methods in veterinary practice

Steam sterilization (autoclave)

The primary method for metal instruments, textiles, and most reusable surgical supplies.

Mechanism: High-pressure saturated steam denatures proteins and destroys cell membranes across all microorganism types including spores.

Standard parameters:

Gravity displacement cycle: 121°C at 15 psi for 15 minutes
Pre-vacuum cycle: 132°C for 4 minutes (faster; requires functional vacuum pump)

Advantages: Reliable, fast, low-cost per cycle, no toxic residues.

Limitations: Cannot be used for heat-sensitive instruments (flexible endoscopes, some electronic components, plastics that melt or warp).

Dry heat sterilization

Mechanism: Oxidation of cellular components at high temperature without moisture.

Parameters: 160°C for 120 minutes; 170°C for 60 minutes.

Indications: Instruments that corrode with moisture (some cutting edges, certain alloys). Powders and oils that steam cannot penetrate.

Limitations: Longer cycle times; higher energy cost; not suitable for heat-sensitive materials.

Chemical sterilization (liquid sterilants)

Mechanism: Alkylation or oxidation of microbial proteins and nucleic acids.

Agents and contact times:

Glutaraldehyde 2%: 6 to 10 hours for sterilization (versus 20 to 30 minutes for high-level disinfection only)
7.5% hydrogen peroxide: 6 hours at 20°C for sterilization

Indications: Heat-sensitive critical devices that cannot be autoclaved (some arthroscopes, fiber-optic equipment).

Limitations: Items must be fully immersed; residual agent must be rinsed before use; sterility is not maintained after removal from solution unless aseptic transfer is used.

Ethylene oxide (EtO) gas sterilization

Mechanism: Alkylation of DNA and proteins; kills all microorganisms including resistant spores.

Indications: Heat-sensitive and moisture-sensitive devices (some electronic implants, complex optics).

Limitations: Requires specialized equipment and aeration period (12 to 24 hours) to remove toxic residues before clinical use. High cost; not practical for most general veterinary practices.

For how sterilization is validated, including biological indicator protocols, chemical indicator interpretation, and what to do when a sterilization cycle fails, that guide covers the validation process in full.

Sterilization validation: the quality control bridge

Sterilization cannot be assumed. It must be confirmed. The three-level monitoring system:

Level 1: Mechanical monitoring

Recording temperature, pressure, and time for each autoclave cycle. Modern autoclaves print cycle records automatically. These records should be filed and reviewed periodically as part of the clinic's quality system.

Mechanical monitoring confirms the autoclave ran a cycle. It does not confirm the cycle achieved sterility.

Level 2: Chemical indicators

Chemical indicator strips and integrators inside and outside instrument packs change appearance when exposed to sterilization conditions.

External indicators confirm the pack was exposed to a cycle
Internal indicators confirm the sterilizing agent penetrated the pack interior
Class 5 and 6 integrating indicators provide the closest chemical approximation to a sterility confirmation

Critical limitation: Chemical indicators confirm exposure to sterilization conditions. They do not confirm the biological kill standard was met.

Level 3: Biological indicators (spore tests)

Biological indicators contain Geobacillus stearothermophilus spores (the most resistant organism to steam sterilization). If the autoclave cycle kills these spores, it confirms the cycle achieved the required sterility standard.

Biological indicators are the only confirmation of functional sterilization efficacy.

Recommended frequency: weekly in active veterinary surgical practices; after any autoclave service or malfunction; when a chemical indicator failure is observed.

For the instrument sterilization protocol, including the step-by-step process from instrument cleaning through packaging, sterilization, storage, and shelf-life management, that guide covers the full instrument reprocessing protocol.

How asepsis preserves sterilization

Sterilization achieves sterility at a point in time. Asepsis is what preserves that sterility from that point through wound closure.

The chain of asepsis after sterilization:

Pack integrity maintained during storage: No tears, moisture, or compromised seals
Expiry date respected: Sterility is time-limited; shelf-life management is part of the asepsis system
Sterile opening technique: Circulating nurse opens the pack without contacting the sterile contents; contents dropped or transferred to the sterile field without touching the non-sterile outer packaging
Aseptic instrument handling: Instruments handled only by gowned, gloved scrub personnel; not dropped below table level; not contaminated by non-sterile contact
Sterile field maintenance: Entire operative period managed to prevent any non-sterile item from contacting sterile instruments or the wound

If any step in this chain fails, the sterilization was wasted. An instrument that was sterile when packed but handled with non-sterile technique at the table is contaminated before it enters the wound.

For aseptic technique applied to preserving sterility, including the specific intraoperative behaviors that protect sterile instruments from re-contamination, that guide provides the technique reference that complements sterilization.

Sterilization sits at the top of the microbial control hierarchy, above both disinfection and antisepsis. Understanding where each level applies prevents the common error of applying a lower standard than the clinical situation requires. For disinfection vs. asepsis comparison, including how the three levels of disinfection compare to sterilization and when each applies in veterinary practice, that guide covers the Spaulding classification and the full hierarchy of microbial control.

For antisepsis in the broader asepsis framework, including how antisepsis applied to living tissue relates to sterilization of instruments within the same perioperative infection control system, that guide covers the complementary antisepsis component.

Common failures at the sterilization-asepsis interface

Failure point	Consequence	Prevention
Chemical indicator not checked before use	Non-sterile pack used unknowingly	Mandatory indicator check before any pack is opened
Pack expiry date exceeded	Sterility not guaranteed	Label all packs with sterilization date; follow clinic shelf-life policy
Biological indicator not performed	Sterilizer malfunction undetected	Weekly BI testing; log all results
Non-sterile opening technique	Sterile contents contaminated before reaching field	Train and observe opening technique; designate this as a checklist item
Instrument dropped below table level and returned	Contaminated instrument in wound	Replace any instrument that falls below table level without exception

Frequently asked questions

Is sterilization the same as disinfection at a higher level?

No. Disinfection reduces microbial load and kills most pathogens but does not reliably kill all bacterial spores. Sterilization destroys all microorganisms including spores and achieves an absolute sterility standard. High-level disinfection can approach sterilization with extended contact times, but the two are formally distinct levels of microbial control with different validation standards.

How long do sterilized packs remain sterile?

This depends on packaging type and storage conditions. Event-related sterility is the current standard: a pack remains sterile until something happens to compromise it (moisture exposure, torn packaging, improper storage), rather than a fixed time period. Many clinics use a defined shelf life (e.g., 6 months for double-wrapped packs in clean, dry storage) as a practical policy even though the scientific standard is event-related.

What should happen if a biological indicator comes back positive?

All packs sterilized since the last successful biological indicator test should be removed from use immediately. The autoclave should be taken out of service, inspected, and repaired. A new biological indicator should be run before the autoclave returns to service. All clinical cases performed using instruments from potentially non-sterile packs should be flagged for post-operative monitoring. Document the incident and all corrective actions.

Can aseptic technique compensate for a failed sterilization cycle?

No. If an instrument is not sterile, no amount of correct aseptic technique during the procedure prevents the contamination it carries from entering the wound. Sterilization is a prerequisite. Asepsis preserves it. Neither substitutes for the other.

Sterilization and asepsis are not competing approaches or different words for the same thing. Sterilization is the process that creates the starting condition for safe surgery. Asepsis is the system of practices that maintains that condition. Both must function correctly for surgical infection control to hold.

Resources

The following sources were used as reference and background for this article:

Veterian Key. Sterilization and Disinfection. veteriankey.com
Today's Veterinary Nurse. Keys to Successful High-Level Disinfection and Sterilization Processes. todaysveterinarynurse.com
GWU Office of Research Safety. Sterilization, Disinfection, and Decontamination. researchsafety.gwu.edu
Wiley Online Library. Disinfection and Sterilization, Veterinary Microbiology. onlinelibrary.wiley.com

Read Blog Post

Asepsis

5 min read

Surgical Site Preparation in Dogs: Complete Guide

Learn essential steps and tips for surgical site preparation in dogs to ensure safe and infection-free surgeries.

Surgical site preparation is the first line of defense against surgical site infection (SSI).

The goal is to reduce the bacterial load on the skin to the lowest achievable level before the incision is made.

Every step in the preparation protocol matters a single shortcut can undermine the entire chain.

Quick answer: Canine surgical site preparation follows a fixed sequence: clip a wide area in the prep room, perform an initial scrub for gross decontamination, then in the OR perform the aseptic scrub center-to-periphery using chlorhexidine or povidone-iodine, then drape. Never clip or scrub in the OR.

Key takeaways

Clip a wide margin around the incision site: at minimum 5 to 10 cm on each side; more is better
Clip in the prep room, not the OR: loose hair and dander are OR contaminants
Initial scrub removes gross contamination (oils, bacteria, debris) before the aseptic scrub begins in the OR
Aseptic scrub technique: target pattern center to periphery, discard gauze after each pass, never return toward center
Chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine are both acceptable: do not mix them on the same patient due to potential chemical incompatibility
Alcohol rinsing between antiseptic applications improves bacterial kill; contact time for each application must be respected

Why site preparation matters

The preparation protocol addresses both.

Step 1: Pre-clipping assessment

Before clipping, assess the skin in the intended surgical field:

Note any existing wounds, abrasions, or skin conditions
Identify regional lymph nodes for palpation
Confirm the surgical site with the team before hair removal

Step 2: Hair clipping

Clipping is performed in the designated preparation area, not in the operating room. Loose hair shed into the OR environment is a contamination source.

Technique:

Use electric clippers with a surgical blade (size 40 preferred: finer cut, closer to skin)
Clip the direction of hair growth first, then against it for a closer result
Clip a wide field minimum 5 to 10 cm beyond the proposed incision on all sides
Do not clip the skin itself guard against clipper trauma which creates skin breaks and increases SSI risk

Step 3: Initial scrub (gross decontamination)

The initial scrub is performed in the prep room before the patient enters the OR. It removes surface oils, organic matter, and loose debris.

This is not the aseptic scrub it prepares the skin for it.

Step 4: Patient transfer to OR

The patient is moved to the OR and positioned on the surgical table. The prepared site must not contact non-sterile surfaces during transfer.

Limbs may be loosely wrapped or positioned to avoid contact.

Step 5: Aseptic scrub in the OR

Once the patient is properly positioned, secured to the operating room table, and connected to all anesthetic monitoring equipment, the aseptic scrub can be performed.

The target pattern:

Critical rules:

Always work center to periphery never return toward the incision center with a used gauze
Discard each gauze after a single outward pass
The scrubbing team wears sterile gloves
Contact time must be respected do not wipe off prematurely

Antiseptic selection

Chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG)

Chlorhexidine kills a wide range of bacteria and has residual activity, meaning it continues working after application.

Chlorhexidine gluconate is often considered superior to povidone-iodine because of its longer residual action.

CHG is the more commonly recommended agent for veterinary surgical site preparation based on human medicine data showing superiority over PI, particularly with alcoholic formulations.

Povidone-iodine (PI)

Povidone-iodine is effective against bacteria, viruses, and fungi, and is commonly used in veterinary surgery.

PI has excellent immediate kill but minimal residual activity once dry.

Do not mix antiseptics

Choose one antiseptic and use it throughout the entire preparation protocol.

Step 6: Draping

After the aseptic scrub, the sterile team applies four corner drapes secured with towel clamps, followed by a large fenestrated drape over the patient and table.

Draping rules: drapes can only be moved away from the incision site. A drape moved toward the incision contaminates the sterile field.

For the full draping guide, see draping techniques in small animal surgery. For the surgical hand scrub that precedes site preparation, see veterinary surgical hand scrub protocol guide.

For the SSI prevention overview, see how to prevent surgical site infections in dogs.

Frequently asked questions

Can I clip and scrub in the operating room?

No. Clipping should always be performed in a designated prep area separate from the OR. Loose hair contaminated with skin bacteria sheds into the OR environment and settles on sterile surfaces.

Clipping in the OR is a recognized SSI risk factor.

How wide should the clip area be?

At minimum 5 to 10 cm beyond the proposed incision on all sides.

In practice, clip wider than you think you need running out of prepared skin during surgery is worse than clipping a little more than necessary.

Should I use chlorhexidine or povidone-iodine?

Both are acceptable. Chlorhexidine has longer residual activity; povidone-iodine has excellent immediate kill. Do not mix them.

Most current guidance leans toward chlorhexidine (ideally in alcoholic formulation) based on human surgery data showing superior SSI reduction, though veterinary-specific evidence is more limited.

How many scrub cycles are required?

Protocol varies by clinic. A typical approach is three antiseptic scrub cycles with alcohol rinse between each.

The key is achieving the required contact time for your chosen antiseptic and removing each gauze after a single outward pass. Follow the antiseptic manufacturer's contact time recommendation.

Can I scrub toward the incision center if I see a missed area?

Never. Once a gauze has passed outward, it is contaminated with the organisms it picked up from the skin periphery.

A new gauze must be used for any additional scrubbing of the central area. Returning inward with a used gauze violates the core principle of aseptic scrub technique.

Resources

Clinician's Brief. Preoperative Surgical Site Preparation in Veterinary Medicine. cliniciansbrief.com
PMC. Comparative Clinical Effectiveness of Preoperative Skin Antiseptic Preparations of CHG and PI for Preventing SSIs in Dogs. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
PMC. Skin Asepsis Protocols as a Preventive Measure of SSI in Dogs: Chlorhexidine-Alcohol versus Povidone-Iodine. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
The Veterinary Nurse. Surgical Site Infections: Preparation, Technique and Perioperative Prevention. theveterinarynurse.com
VetNurse. Surgical Skin Preparation: Best Practice Protocol. vetnurse.com.au

Read Blog Post

Preventing Post-Operative Infections in Dogs

Asepsis

5 min read

Preventing Post-Operative Infections in Dogs

Learn effective ways to prevent post-operative infections in dogs with expert tips on care, hygiene, and monitoring after surgery.

Most post-operative infections in dogs don't happen in the operating room. They happen at home, in the days after surgery, when the wound is healing and the owner is managing recovery.

That's where the risk is, and where you have the most control.

Quick answer: Preventing post-operative infections in dogs requires four owner-controlled actions: keeping the E-collar on at all times to prevent licking, checking the incision daily for early warning signs, restricting activity to protect the healing wound, and completing all prescribed medications on schedule. Missing any of these significantly raises infection risk.

Key takeaways

Licking is the most preventable cause of post-operative infection in dogs at home.
E-collar compliance is mandatory: keep it on until the vet confirms the incision is healed.
Activity restriction protects the wound from mechanical disruption that opens pathways for bacteria.
Daily incision checks catch early infection before it becomes a deep, harder-to-treat problem.
Stopping antibiotics early is one of the most common owner errors that causes recurrence.
The 10-14 day recheck is not optional: it confirms healing and removes sutures aseptically.

The biggest mistake dog owners make after surgery

It's not neglect. It's letting the dog lick.

A dog's mouth contains Staphylococcus pseudintermedius and dozens of other bacteria. When a dog licks a surgical incision, it delivers those bacteria directly to the wound, bypassing every sterile precaution the surgeon took.

The E-collar isn't a punishment. It's the most important infection-prevention tool your dog will use at home.

PetsCare confirms: "Keep your pet's surgical wound clean and dry, restrict activity, prevent licking or scratching, and monitor for signs of infection."

E-collar rules: what owners get wrong

Most owners understand the E-collar concept. What they get wrong is compliance.

When the E-collar must be on:

At all times when unsupervised
All night while the dog sleeps
During leash walks
Any time you leave the room

When it can come off:

Eating and drinking : under direct supervision only
Bathing the unaffected part of the dog : under direct supervision only

Common owner error: Removing the E-collar "just for a few minutes" while the dog looks comfortable. It takes seconds for a dog to lick a wound. One breach can introduce enough bacteria to establish an infection.

Daily wound monitoring: what normal looks like vs. what doesn't

Check the incision at the same time each day in good lighting.

Normal healing progression

Days Post-Surgery	What You Should See
1 to 3	Mild redness at wound edges, slight swelling, possibly clear or pink-tinged fluid
3 to 7	Redness fading, swelling reducing, wound edges beginning to close
7 to 14	Edges fully closed, minimal redness, hair beginning to regrow

Signs that require a same-day vet call

Spreading redness beyond the incision margin
Yellow, green, or opaque discharge from the wound
Foul odor at the wound site
Increasing swelling after day 3 (should be decreasing, not increasing)
Sutures separating or the wound reopening
Dog obsessively pawing at the site despite the E-collar

Activity restriction: why it matters for infection prevention

Activity restriction is not only about protecting the surgical repair. It's about preventing infection.

Running and jumping create mechanical stress on healing tissue. This can:

Open gaps between wound layers, creating dead space where bacteria multiply
Disrupt early scar tissue formation, exposing deeper tissue
Loosen sutures and pull wound edges apart

Standard activity restriction after surgery:

Weeks 1 to 2: Leash walks for bathroom trips only. No stairs, no jumping, no running.
Weeks 2 to 4: Short controlled leash walks only. No off-leash activity.
Weeks 4 to 8: Gradual return to normal activity as cleared by your vet.

For orthopedic procedures, restrictions typically extend to 8 to 12 weeks. Follow your specific surgeon's protocol, not a general timeline.

Medication compliance: the full course matters

Stopping antibiotics when your dog "looks better" is one of the most common owner errors in post-operative care.

Why finishing the course matters:

Bacteria are not eliminated uniformly; the last few days of treatment kill the most resistant survivors
Stopping early allows surviving bacteria to multiply and potentially develop resistance
A second round of antibiotics after early cessation often requires a stronger drug

Rule: Never stop antibiotics before completing the prescribed course, even if the wound looks completely healed.

Pain medications: give these on schedule too. Adequate pain control reduces stress, reduces cortisol (which impairs healing), and keeps the dog calm enough to rest.

Wound cleaning at home: what vets actually recommend

Unless your vet has given specific instructions to clean the wound, don't clean it.

This surprises many owners, but routine wound cleaning can:

Disrupt the early healing process
Remove protective fibrin that seals wound edges
Introduce bacteria from the cleaning materials

What to do instead:

Keep the wound dry
Do not apply hydrogen peroxide, rubbing alcohol, or over-the-counter antiseptics
Do not apply any ointment, cream, or spray unless specifically prescribed

If your vet instructs wound cleaning, use only the solution they specify (typically dilute chlorhexidine) applied with a clean gauze pad; never use cotton balls, which shed fibers.

Recovery environment setup

A clean recovery space reduces environmental bacterial load.

Home setup checklist:

[ ] Wash all bedding in hot water before your dog comes home
[ ] Set up a confined recovery area (exercise pen or crate) away from other pets
[ ] Remove anything the dog can jump on or off
[ ] Place non-slip mats on hard floors to prevent slipping
[ ] Keep the recovery area dry: damp environments encourage bacterial growth
[ ] Change bedding every 2 to 3 days during recovery

For wound-level infection prevention strategies, see wound-level infection prevention. For a complete SSI prevention protocol guide, see specific SSI prevention guide. For what recovery looks like in cats for comparison, see post-operative infection prevention in cats for comparison.

Following up: the rechecks you can't skip

Post-operative rechecks are designed around the infection timeline, not just wound healing.

Recheck	Timing	What Happens
First recheck	10 to 14 days	Suture/staple removal, incision assessment, medication review
Second recheck	4 to 6 weeks	Progress imaging (for orthopedic cases), implant check
Final recheck	8 to 12 weeks	Return to activity clearance

Missing a recheck delays detection of early infection before it becomes established. Early-stage infections caught at a 10-day recheck are managed far more simply than infections diagnosed at 3 to 4 weeks.

For the full infection timeline and when infections typically appear, see when post-operative infections most commonly occur. For how to distinguish healing from early infection, see how to tell if prevention has worked.

When to go to the emergency vet, not wait

Go immediately, do not wait for a callback, if:

The wound is bleeding and doesn't stop within 5 minutes
The wound has opened significantly with visible tissue or fat underneath
Your dog collapses or can't stand
Rapidly spreading redness or warmth covers a large skin area
Your dog has a fever and severe lethargy together

Frequently asked questions

My dog is acting completely normal but the wound looks slightly red. Should I worry?

Mild redness at the wound margin is normal in the first 2 to 3 days. Monitor it. If the redness is spreading outward from the wound, appearing after day 4, or accompanied by any discharge or odor, call your vet that day. Don't wait to see if it gets better.

My dog keeps pawing at the incision through the E-collar. What should I do?

First, confirm the E-collar is correctly sized: it should extend past the dog's nose by several inches. If it's the right size and the dog can still reach the wound, the collar may need to be supplemented with a recovery body suit or a different style of collar. Contact your vet for guidance.

Do I need to clean the stitches?

In most cases, no. Keep them dry. Your vet will give specific instructions if the wound requires cleaning. The most important step is monitoring, not touching.

Post-operative infection prevention is not complicated. It requires discipline. The E-collar stays on. The wound gets checked daily. The medications get finished. The follow-up appointments get kept. These four things, done consistently, prevent the majority of infections that develop after dog surgery.

Resources

Pooler Veterinary Hospital. Pet Wound Care at Home: Post-Surgery Healing Tips. poolervet.com
Kainer Vet. Effective Post-Surgical Care for Dogs to Ensure Full Recovery. kainervet.com
PetsCare. How to Care for Your Pet's Surgical Wound. petscare.com

Read Blog Post

Get Your
‍Free Poster!

We will work on your request shortly.

Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

What’s your role in animal care?

Tell us who you are so we can guide you to the most relevant information.

Pet Owner

Veterinary Professional