H M Park1, S-S Han1, E C Lee1, S D Lee1, H M Yoon2, B W Eom2, S H Kim1, K W Ryu2, S-J Park1, Y W Kim2, B Park3. 1. Centre for Liver Cancer, National Cancer Centre, South Korea. 2. Centre for Gastric Cancer, National Cancer Centre, South Korea. 3. Biometric Research Branch, Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Centre, South Korea.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Skin antiseptic agents are used to prevent surgical-site infection (SSI); few trials have reported the superiority of any specific agent in clean-contaminated abdominal surgery. This RCT was designed to compare the effectiveness of chlorhexidine gluconate and povidone-iodine. METHODS:Consecutive patients who underwent clean-contaminated upper gastrointestinal or hepatobiliary-pancreatic open surgery between 2011 and 2014 were assigned randomly to either chlorhexidine gluconate or povidone-iodine. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of SSI within 30 days of surgery. Secondary endpoints included causative organisms and risk factors for SSI. RESULTS: A total of 534 patients were randomized; 31 (5·8 per cent) developed an SSI. There was no difference in the overall SSI rate in the chlorhexidine gluconate and povidone-iodine groups: 15 of 267 (5·6 per cent) and 16 of 267 (6·0 per cent) respectively (P = 0·853). The most common causative organism was Enterococcus faecalis. In subgroup analysis, biliary-pancreatic surgery had a higher SSI rate (26 of 127, 20·5 per cent) than upper gastrointestinal (2 of 204, 1·0 per cent) and hepatic (3 of 203, 1·5 per cent) resection. Both age (60 years and over) and type of incision were associated with the risk of SSI. CONCLUSION: No difference was detected between chlorhexidine gluconate and povidone-iodine antiseptics for prevention of SSI. Registration number: NCT01495117 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Skin antiseptic agents are used to prevent surgical-site infection (SSI); few trials have reported the superiority of any specific agent in clean-contaminated abdominal surgery. This RCT was designed to compare the effectiveness of chlorhexidine gluconate and povidone-iodine. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent clean-contaminated upper gastrointestinal or hepatobiliary-pancreatic open surgery between 2011 and 2014 were assigned randomly to either chlorhexidine gluconate or povidone-iodine. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of SSI within 30 days of surgery. Secondary endpoints included causative organisms and risk factors for SSI. RESULTS: A total of 534 patients were randomized; 31 (5·8 per cent) developed an SSI. There was no difference in the overall SSI rate in the chlorhexidine gluconate and povidone-iodine groups: 15 of 267 (5·6 per cent) and 16 of 267 (6·0 per cent) respectively (P = 0·853). The most common causative organism was Enterococcus faecalis. In subgroup analysis, biliary-pancreatic surgery had a higher SSI rate (26 of 127, 20·5 per cent) than upper gastrointestinal (2 of 204, 1·0 per cent) and hepatic (3 of 203, 1·5 per cent) resection. Both age (60 years and over) and type of incision were associated with the risk of SSI. CONCLUSION: No difference was detected between chlorhexidine gluconate and povidone-iodine antiseptics for prevention of SSI. Registration number: NCT01495117 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).
Authors: Elisabeth Maurer; Alexander Reuss; Katja Maschuw; Behnaz Aminossadati; Thomas Neubert; Carmen Schade-Brittinger; Detlef K Bartsch Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2019-05-24 Impact factor: 5.594
Authors: Brenda L Kick; Sanjeev Gumber; Heqiong Wang; Reneé H Moore; Douglas K Taylor Journal: J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci Date: 2019-01-04 Impact factor: 1.232
Authors: Emilio Bouza; Arístides de Alarcón; María Carmen Fariñas; Juan Gálvez; Miguel Ángel Goenaga; Francisco Gutiérrez-Díez; Javier Hortal; José Lasso; Carlos A Mestres; José M Miró; Enrique Navas; Mercedes Nieto; Antonio Parra; Enrique Pérez de la Sota; Hugo Rodríguez-Abella; Marta Rodríguez-Créixems; Jorge Rodríguez-Roda; Gemma Sánchez Espín; Dolores Sousa; Carlos Velasco García de Sierra; Patricia Muñoz; Martha Kestler Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2021-11-26 Impact factor: 4.241