Individuals naturally carry bacteria and other microbes as part of their natural flora, with some being opportunistic pathogens. Approximately 30% of the population is known to carry Staphylococcus aureus in their nasal cavity, an organism that causes infections ranging from soft tissue abscesses to toxic shock syndrome. This problem is compounded by the presence of antibiotic-resistant strains such as Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Commensal bacteria present on cadavers pose a risk to those who handle the body. As a Medical School Anatomy laboratory that performs hands-on cadaveric dissection, we wanted to know whether the embalming process is sufficient to kill all commensal bacteria that pose a risk to staff and students. Even if these strains do not cause disease in these individuals, secondary transmission could occur to friends and family, who may be at higher risk of acquiring an infection. Embalming is assumed to eliminate all microbial contamination on the body. However, there are limited studies to confirm this. This study characterises the incidence of antibiotic sensitive and resistant bacteria in cadavers donated for medical teaching and research. We have screened for Methicillin-Resistant Organisms (MRO) and Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase (ESBL) producing bacteria. In this study group of cadavers, approximately 46% (16/35) carry an MRO, while 51% (18/35) carry an ESBL positive organism prior to embalming. By determining the organisms’ presence pre- and post-embalming, we can evaluate the embalming procedure’s effectiveness. Our results show embalming eliminates detectable microbes in about 51% (18/35) of the cadavers. MRO dropped by 75% (16 to 4 positive cadavers), while ESBL organisms went down by almost 95% (from 18 to 1 positive cadaver). There was a further decrease in the number of positive cadavers after storage at 4 °C to 6% (2/32). Thus, although the embalming process does not immediately sterilise all the cadavers, prolonged storage at 4 °C can further reduce the number of viable bacteria.

Decontamination of surfaces and items plays an important role in reducing the spread of infectious microorganisms in many settings including hospitals and research institutes. Regardless of the location, appropriate decontamination procedures are required for maintaining biosafety and biosecurity. For example, effective decontamination of microbial cultures is essential to ensure proper biocontainment and safety within microbiological laboratories. To this end, many commercial decontamination agents are available which have been tested to a prescribed standard to substantiate their efficacy. However, these standardised tests are unlikely to accurately reflect all conditions encountered in medical and biomedical research. Despite this, laboratory workers and other users of decontamination agents may assume that all decontamination agents will work in all situations. We tested commonly used commercial decontamination agents against a range of bacterial species to determine their efficacy under real-world laboratory conditions. As each decontamination agent has a different recommended dilution for use, to compare their efficacy we calculated their ‘effective ratio’ which reflects the difference between the manufacturer-recommended dilution and the dilution needed to achieve decontamination under real-world laboratory conditions. Effective ratios above 1 indicate that the agent was active at a dilution more dilute than recommended whereas effective ratios lower than 1 indicate that the agent required a higher concentration than recommended. Our results show that the quaternary ammonium agents TriGene Advance and Chemgene HLD4L were the most active out of the agents tested, with biocidal activity measured at up to 64 times the recommended dilution. In contrast, hypochlorite (bleach) and Prevail™ (stabilised hydrogen peroxide) had the lowest effective ratios amongst the tested agents. In conclusion, our data suggest that not all decontamination agents will work at the recommended dilutions under real-world laboratory conditions. We recommend that the protocols for the use of decontamination agents are verified under the specific conditions required to ensure they are fit for purpose.