What to use in preoperative skin preparation: povidone-iodine or chlorhexidine?

Authors

  • Adriana Cristina de Oliveira Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais
  • Camila Sarmento Gama Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5327/Z1414-4425201800030007

Keywords:

Anti-infecciosos locais, Antissepsia, Clorexidina, Povidona-Iodo, Etanol.

Abstract

Objective: To discuss the efficacy of chlorhexidine gluconate and povidone-iodine in aqueous or alcoholic solutions in reducing surgical site
infections and skin bacterial counts in the preoperative preparation of the patient. Method: Reflective study about the best antiseptic to use in preoperative
skin preparation. Results: We found that chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine are equally safe and effective and that international guidelines for good
practices have recommended their use in alcoholic solutions. We observed a trend in recommending alcoholic chlorhexidine and an emergence of studies
that have evaluated the sequential or concurrent use of chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine with favorable results for this practice. Conclusion: There is
a global trend that favors the use of alcoholic chlorhexidine over povidone-iodine. However, the decision about the best antiseptic agent to useshould be
based on each clinical case, (contra)indications, and situation.

References

REFERÊNCIAS

A nderson DJ, Podgorny K, Berríos-Torres SI, Bratzler DW, Dellinger

EP, Greene L, et al. Strategies to prevent surgical site infections in

acute care hospitals: 2014 update. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol.

;35(6):605-27. https://dx.doi.org/10.1086%2F676022

World Health Organization. Global guidelines for the prevention of

surgical site infection. Genebra: World Health Organization; 2016. 186p.

World Health Organization. WHO guidelines on hand hygiene in health

care. Genebra: World Health Organization; 2009. 270p.

Food and Drug Administration. Tentative final monograph for

healthcare antiseptic drug products; proposed rule. Federal Register.

;59:31441-52.

Hemani ML, Lepor H. Skin preparation for the prevention of surgical

site infection: which agent is best? Rev Urol. 2009;11(4):190-5.

Srinivas A, Kaman L, Raj P, Gautam V, Dahiya D, Singh G, et al.

Comparison of the efficacy of chlorhexidine gluconate versus povidone

iodine as preoperative skin preparation for the prevention of surgical

site infections in clean-contaminated upper abdominal surgeries. Surg

Today. 2015;45(11):1378-84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-014-1078-y

U niversidade Federal do Triângulo Mineiro. Comissão de Controle de

Infecção Hospitalar. Manual de antissépticos padronizados do HC/

UFTM [Internet]. 2013 [citado em 11 mar. 2018]. Disponível em: http://

www.ebserh.gov.br/documents/147715/148046/ ANTISSEPTICOS_

PADRONIZADOS.pdf/5aee0778-a1c3-4f69-a75e-81b0159bb4c9

Darouiche RO, Wall MJJ, Itani KM, Otterson MF, Webb AL , Carrick MM,

et al. Chlorhexidine-alcohol versus povidone-iodine for surgical-site

antisepsis. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(1):18-26. https://doi.org/10.1056/

NEJMoa0810988

Rodrigues AL , Simões MLPB. Incidence of surgical site infection

with pre-operative skin preparation using 10% polyvidone-iodine

and 0,5% chlorhexidine-alcohol. Rev Col Bras Cir. 2013;40(6):443-8.

Springel EH, Wang X-Y, Sarfoh VM, Stetzer BP, Weight SA, Mercer

BM, et al. A randomized open-label controlled trial of chlorhexidinealcohol

vs povidone-iodine for cesarean antisepsis: the CAPICA trial.

Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217(4):463.e1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

ajog.2017.05.060

Charehbili A, Swijnenburg RJ, Van de Velde C, Van den Bremer J,

Van Gijn W. A retrospective analysis of surgical site infections after

chlorhexidine–alcohol versus iodine–alcohol for pre-operative

antisepsis. Surg Infect. 2014;15(3):310-3. https://doi.org/10.1089/

sur.2012.185

Patrick S, McDowell A, Lee A, Frau A, Martin U, Gardner E, et al.

Antisepsis of the skin before spinal surgery with povidone iodinealcohol

followed by chlorhexidine gluconate-alcohol versus povidone

iodine-alcohol applied twice for the prevention of contamination of

the wound by bacteria. Bone Joint J. 2017;99-B(10):1354-65. https://

doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.99B10.BJJ-2017-0291.R1

E dmiston CE, Bruden B, Rucinski MC, Henen C, Graham MB, L ewis

BL. Reducing the risk of surgical site infections: does chlorhexidine

gluconate provide a risk reduction benefit? Am J Infect Control.

;41(5 Supl.):S49-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2012.10.030

Swenson BR, Hedrick TL, Metzger R, Bonatti H, Pruett TL, Sawyer

RG. Effects of preoperative skin preparation on postoperative wound

infection rates: a prospective study of 3 skin preparation protocols.

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2009;30(10):964-71. https://doi.

org/10.1086/605926

Mainwald M, Widmer AF, Rotter ML. Lack of evidence for attributing

chlorexidine as the main active ingredient in skin antiseptics preventing

surgical site infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2011;32(4):404-

https://doi.org/10.1086/659253

Bibi S, Shah SA, Qureshi S, Siddiqui TR, Soomro IA, A hmed W, et

al. Is chlorhexidine-gluconate superior than Povidone-Iodine in

preventing surgical site infections? A multicenter study. J Pak Med

Assoc. 2015;65(11):1197-201.

U ppal S, Bazzi A, Reynolds RK, Harris J, Pearlman MD, Campbell

DA, et al. Chlorhexidinealcohol

compared with povidoneiodine

for preoperative topical antisepsis for abdominal hysterectomy.

Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130(2):319-27. https://doi.org/10.1097/

AOG.0000000000002130

Lee I, Agarwal RK, Lee BY, Fishman NO, Umscheid CA. Systematic

review and cost analysis comparing use of chlorhexidine with use

of iodine for preoperative skin antisepsis to prevent surgical site

infection. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2010;31(12):1219-29.

https://doi.org/10.1086/657134

E dwards PS, Lipp A, Holmes A. Preoperative skin antiseptics

for preventing surgical wound infections after clean surgery.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004;(3):CD003949. https://doi.

org/10.1002/14651858.CD003949.pub2

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Surgical site

infection: evidence update June 2013. Evidence update 43. 2013. 28p.

Cowperthwaite L, Holm RL. Guideline implementation: preoperative

patient skin antisepsis. AORN J. 2015;101(1):71-7. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.aorn.2014.11.009

A nderson MJ, Horn ME, Lin YC, Parks PJ, Peterson ML. Efficacy

of concurrent application of chlorhexidine gluconate and povidone

iodine against six nosocomial pathogens. Am J Infect Control.

;38(10):826-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2010.06.022

L anggartner J, Linde HJ, Lehn N, Reng M, Schölmerich J, Glück

T. Combined skin disinfection with chlorhexidine/propanol and

aqueous povidone-iodine reduces bacterial colonisation of central

venous catheters. Intensive Care Med. 2004;30(6):1081-8. https://

doi.org/10.1007/s00134-004-2282-9

Guzel A, Ozekinci T, Ozkan U, Celik Y, Ceviz A, Belen D. Evaluation of

the skin flora after chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine preparation in

neurosurgical practice. Surg Neurol. 2009;71(2):207-10. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.surneu.2007.10.026

Davies BM, Patel HC. Does chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine

preoperative antisepsis reduce surgical site infection in cranial

neurosurgery? Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2016;98(6):405-8. https://doi.

org/10.1308/rcsann.2016.0143

Davies BM, Patel HC. Systematic review and meta-analysis of

preoperative antisepsis with combination chlorhexidine and povidoneiodine.

Surg J. 2016;2(3):e70-7. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0036-1587691

Downloads

Published

2018-08-30

How to Cite

de Oliveira, A. C., & Sarmento Gama, C. (2018). What to use in preoperative skin preparation: povidone-iodine or chlorhexidine?. Revista SOBECC, 23(3), 155–159. https://doi.org/10.5327/Z1414-4425201800030007

Issue

Vol. 23 No. 3 (2018)

Section

REVIEW ARTICLES

License

By publishing in Revista SOBECC, authors retain the copyright of their article and agree to license their work using a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) International Public License, thus accepting the terms of this license. The CC BY 4.0 license allows others to distribute, remix, adapt, and create from the published article, even for commercial purposes, provided they give due credit to the creators of the work (authors of the article).

The authors grant to Revista SOBECC the right of first publication, to identify itself as the original publisher, and grant to the journal a non-exclusive license to use the work in the following ways: (1) to sell and/or distribute the article in hard copies and/or in electronic format; (2) to distribute parts and/or the entire article in order to promote the journal through the internet and other digital and printed media; (3) to record and reproduce the article in any format, including digital media.

With this license, authors can enter into separate contracts for non-exclusive distribution of the article (e.g., publishing in an institutional repository or as a book chapter), with acknowledgement of authorship and initial publication in Revista SOBECC. Authors are encouraged to publish and distribute their work online after publication in the Revista SOBECC, as this can increase the article's visibility and impact.

In line with the journal's policies, each published article will be assigned a CC BY 4.0 license, which will be visible on the abstract page and in the PDF of each article with the respective link to the license terms.