Disclaimer: Early release articles are not considered as final versions. Any changes will be reflected in the online version in the month the article is officially released.
Volume 31, Number 12—December 2025
Letter
Intraoperative Transmission of Brucellae
Suggested citation for this article
To the Editor: In a recent article, I. Potparić et al. described transmission of Brucella melitensis to an orthopedic surgeon during the irrigation of a spinal infection (1). Although rare, transmission of B. melitensis from patients to the surgical staff has been reported (1–5).
A low inhaled infective dose (102 bacteria) characterizes brucellae, and the organism may enter the human body through the respiratory tract and conjunctivae, representing the most common agents of laboratory-acquired infections (2). Because the concentration of brucellae in body fluids and tissues is low, unseeded biologic specimens are not considered to pose a substantial transmission hazard. However, the risk of contagion increases exponentially after incubation of bacteriologic media. Thus, cultures of presumptive Brucella species bacteria should be processed in biologic safety cabinets (2). Physicians who care for patients with brucellosis, however, are not deemed to be at an increased risk because person-to-person transmission of the disease is extremely uncommon (3,4).
The reported events of intraoperative acquisition of the disease show common factors. The possibility of brucellosis in the patient was not suspected or contemplated, even when the patient was from an endemic region (1–4); the cases involved high-risk procedures, such as unprotected bone drilling and irrigation, or aspiration of respiratory secretions (1,3,4); the surgical procedure created aerosol clouds, or massive spillage of blood, amniotic fluid, or both (3,4); or the medical staff did not consistently wear face masks or goggles (2).
Of note, the 5 published events occurred in nonendemic countries that have advanced medical and laboratory diagnostic capabilities. In contrast, accounts from developing countries, where the zoonosis is rampant, are absent. We presume that lack of adequate epidemiologic surveillance and reporting, and the assumption that the disease was acquired outside the hospital, could be responsible for the missing reports.
References
- Potparić I, Bošnjak K, Avberšek J, Papić B, Bogovič P, Vodičar PM, et al. Investigation of possible intraoperative transmission of Brucella melitensis, Slovenia. Emerg Infect Dis. 2025;31:2034–7. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lowe CF, Showler AJ, Perera S, McIntyre S, Qureshi R, Patel SN, et al. Hospital-associated transmission of Brucella melitensis outside the laboratory. Emerg Infect Dis. 2015;21:150–2. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Mesner O, Riesenberg K, Biliar N, Borstein E, Bouhnik L, Peled N, et al. The many faces of human-to-human transmission of brucellosis: congenital infection and outbreak of nosocomial disease related to an unrecognized clinical case. Clin Infect Dis. 2007;45:e135–40. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Poulou A, Markou F, Xipolitos I, Skandalakis PN. A rare case of Brucella melitensis infection in an obstetrician during the delivery of a transplacentally infected infant. J Infect. 2006;53:e39–41. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kiel FW, Khan MY. Brucellosis among hospital employees in Saudi Arabia. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1993;14:268–72. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
Suggested citation for this article: Yagupsky P. Intraoperative transmission of Brucellae. Emerg Infect Dis. 2025 Dec [date cited]. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid3112.251518
Original Publication Date: December 23, 2025
Related Links
Table of Contents – Volume 31, Number 12—December 2025
| EID Search Options |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please use the form below to submit correspondence to the authors or contact them at the following address:
Pablo Yagupsky, Clinical Microbiology Laboratory, Soroka University Medical Center, Shderot Reger, Beer-Sheva 84101, Israel
Top