BM Davies, HC Patel
Greater Manchester Neuroscience Centre, Salford Royal Foundation Trust, UK
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION Surgical site infection (SSI) is a significant cause of postoperative morbidity and mortality. Effective preoperative antisepsis is a recognised prophylactic, with commonly used agents including chlorhexidine (CHG) and povidone-iodine (PVI). However, there is emerging evidence to suggest an additional benefit when they are used in combination. METHODS We analysed data from our prospective SSI database on patients undergoing clean cranial neurosurgery between October 2011 and April 2014. We compared the case-mix adjusted odds of developing a SSI in patients undergoing skin preparation with CGH or PVI alone or in combination.
RESULTS SSIs were detected in 2.6% of 1146 cases. Antisepsis with PVI alone was performed in 654 (57%) procedures, while 276 (24%) had CHG alone and 216 (19%) CHG and PVI together. SSIs were associated with longer operating time (p<0.001) and
younger age (p=0.03). Surgery type (p<0.001) and length of operation (p<0.001) were significantly different between antisepsis groups. In a binary logistic regression model, CHG and PVI was associated with a significant reduction in the likelihood of developing an SSI (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.02–0.63) than either agent alone. There was no difference in SSI rates between CHG and PVI alone (AOR 0.60, 95% CI 0.24–1.5).
CONCLUSIONS Combination skin preparation with CHG and PVI significantly reduced SSI rates compared to CHG or PVI alone. A prospective, randomized study validating these findings is now warranted.
KEYWORDS
Antisepsis – Chlorhexidine – Neurosurgery – Povidone-iodine – Surgical wound infection
Rohit Mishra, Kabbur Thippanna Chandrashekar, Vandana Dubey Tripathi, Anushree Hazari, Blessy Shin Sabu, Anurag Sahu
Abstract:
Background: Bleeding gums are one of the common complaints to visit a dentist. Mechanical removal of plaque alone is not sufficient for the reduction of gingival inflammation associated with plaque. Mouthwashes are supplemented to it as a homecare product. The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of 0.2% sodium hypochlorite mouthwash on plaque and gingival inflammation and to assess the clinical parameters of gingivitis patients from baseline to 21 days with the use of 0.2% sodium hypochlorite and 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwashes.
Materials and Methods: This clinical trial study included 60 patients with gingival inflammation evaluated using clinical parameters such as bleeding on probing index, plaque index, and gingival index at baseline and 21 days. Group A patients were given Hi Wash mouthwash and Group B 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwash with 30 patients in each group. Results: The scores for clinical parameters were significantly reduced after 21 days in Group A and Group B patients, and there was a reduction in plaque‑associated gingival inflammation without scaling and root planning.
Conclusions: 0.2% sodium hypochlorite mouthwash is as effective as 0.2% chlorhexidine for the treatment of gingivitis as it is an adjunct to mechanical plaque removal in terms of safety, less side effects, less staining and can be used as a routine mouthwash.
Key words:
0. 2% sodium hypochlorite, 0.2% chlorhexidine, gingivitis
佛山市禅城区中心医院慢性伤口造口专科主任。
伤口世界平台生态圈，以“关爱人间所有伤口患者”为愿景，连接、整合和拓展线上和线下的管理慢性伤口的资源，倡导远程、就近和居家管理慢性伤口，解决伤口专家的碎片化时间的价值创造、诊疗经验的裂变复制、和患者的就近、居家和低成本管理慢性伤口的问题。
2019广东省医疗行业协会伤口管理分会年会
扫一扫了解详情:
任何关于疾病的建议都不能替代执业医师的面对面诊断。所有门诊时间仅供参考，最终以医院当日公布为准。
网友、医生言论仅代表其个人观点，不代表本站同意其说法，请谨慎参阅，本站不承担由此引起的法律责任。
