Journal of orthopaedic science : official journal of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association · 2019
Olanexidine gluconate versus povidone-iodine for preventing surgical-site infection in orthopaedic surgery: A retrospective study.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Asukai Mitsuru, Ohishi Tsuyoshi, Fujita Tomotada, Suzuki Daisuke, Nishida Tatsuya, Sugiura Kaori, Matsuyama Yukihiro
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Olanexidine gluconate (OLG) is a newly developed skin antiseptic, which is effective against a broad range of bacteria, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the bactericidal efficacy and safety of OLG in orthopaedic surgery.
METHODS: This retrospective study included a total of 1103 patients who underwent clean orthopaedic surgery. They were divided into two groups: 556 patients who were treated with OLG (OLG group), and 547 patients who were treated with povidone-iodine (PVP-I) (PVP-I group). The efficacy and the safety outcomes were measured as the rate of surgical-site infection (SSI) within 30 days after surgery and the rate of adverse skin reaction, respectively.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the OLG group and PVP-I group (1.80% vs. 2.38%; p = 0.50) based on the overall rate of SSI. Also, there was no significant difference in both superficial incisional infections (1.08% vs. 2.01%; p = 0.21) and deep incisional infections (0.72% vs. 0.37%; p = 0.35). The overall rate of adverse skin reaction was significantly higher in the OLG group than in the PVP-I group (2.16% vs. 0.73%; p = 0.047).
CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study demonstrated that OLG has an efficacy similar to PVP-I in preventing SSI in clean orthopaedic surgery. However, adverse skin reactions at the application site of OLG requires more attention.
METHODS: This retrospective study included a total of 1103 patients who underwent clean orthopaedic surgery. They were divided into two groups: 556 patients who were treated with OLG (OLG group), and 547 patients who were treated with povidone-iodine (PVP-I) (PVP-I group). The efficacy and the safety outcomes were measured as the rate of surgical-site infection (SSI) within 30 days after surgery and the rate of adverse skin reaction, respectively.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the OLG group and PVP-I group (1.80% vs. 2.38%; p = 0.50) based on the overall rate of SSI. Also, there was no significant difference in both superficial incisional infections (1.08% vs. 2.01%; p = 0.21) and deep incisional infections (0.72% vs. 0.37%; p = 0.35). The overall rate of adverse skin reaction was significantly higher in the OLG group than in the PVP-I group (2.16% vs. 0.73%; p = 0.047).
CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study demonstrated that OLG has an efficacy similar to PVP-I in preventing SSI in clean orthopaedic surgery. However, adverse skin reactions at the application site of OLG requires more attention.