Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.22156/CS4SMB.2020.10.10.080

Clinical Study Comparing the Skin Antiseptics of Povidone-iodine and Chlorhexidine-ethanol on Port Site  

Kang, Min Jung (Department of Nursing, Ansan University)
Publication Information
Journal of Convergence for Information Technology / v.10, no.10, 2020 , pp. 80-87 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare in antiseptic effect between povidone-iodine and chlorhexidine-ethanol for laparoscopic cholecystectomy on the port site. A total of 46 patients admitted to surgery at one university hospital in Seoul were included in the study. A study group was randomly assigned using a random number table. The antiseptic effect was evaluated and compared to povidone-iodine and chlorhexidine-ethanol by using a culture and identification of bacteria, measurement of the number of bacteria (CFU/ml) and incidence of surgical site infection. Our results show that povidone-iodine and chlorhexidine-ethanol have no statistically significant difference in the incidence rate of bacteria after 3 minutes of disinfection and before removal of the trocar and in the number of bacteria and the incidence of surgical site infection. Thus, in order to select an efficient and appropriate skin antiseptics, we suggest that it is necessary to consider not only the disinfectant effect but also cost and convenience. In this research, our results about effect and usage of skin antiseptics can be used as basic data and educational resource, and this is expected to improve comprehension of skin antiseptics.
Keywords
Skin antiseptics; Povidone-iodine; Chlorhexidine-ethanol; Port site; Laparoscopic cholecystectomy;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 C. H. Davis, B. A. Shirkey, L. W. Moore, T. Gaglani, X. L. Du, H. R. Bailey & M. V. Cusick. (2018). Trends in laparoscopic colorectal surgery over time from 2005-2014 using the NSQIP database. Journal of Surgical Research, 223, 16-21. DOI : 10.1016/j.jss.2017.09.046   DOI
2 A. P. Legorreta, J. H. Silber, G. N. Costantino, R. W. Kobylinski & S. L. Zatz. (1993). Increased cholecystectomy rate after the introduction of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. JAMA, 270(12), 1429-1432. DOI : 10.1001/jama.1993.03510120051029   DOI
3 S. Karthik, A. J. Augustine, M. M. Shibumon & M. V. Pai. (2013). Analysis of laparoscopic port site complications: A descriptive study. Journal of minimal access surgery, 9(2), 59. DOI : 0.4103/0972-9941.110964   DOI
4 C. Richards, J. Edwards, D. Culver, T. G. Emori, J. Tolson, R. Gaynes & National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) System. (2003). Does using a laparoscopic approach to cholecystectomy decrease the risk of surgical site infection?. Annals of surgery, 237(3), 358. DOI : 10.1097/01.SLA.0000055221   DOI
5 M. K. Al-Naser. (2017). Port Site Infections after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. International Journal of Medical Research & Health Sciences, 6(6), 132-137.
6 L. M. Napolitano. (2006). Decolonization of the skin of the patient and surgeon. Surgical Infections, 7(Supplement 3), s-3. DOI : 10.1089/sur.2006.7.s3-3.   DOI
7 S. J. Choi, E. H. Shim, Y. M. Kim, C. G. Lee, H. J. Cheong & W. J. Kim. (2000). Evaluation of In Vitro Bactericidal Activity of Disinfectants against Major Nosocomial Pathogens. Korean Journal of Nosocomial Infection Control, 5(2), 89-98.
8 ] J. S. Choi, G. J. An & S. M. Park. (2011). Affecting Factors on Hospital Nurses' Practice of Disinfection: Focused on Alcohol, Chlorhexidine Gulconate, and Povidone Iodine. Journal of Korean Biological Nursing Science, 13(2), 125-133.
9 ] E. Spaziani, A. Di Filippo, S. Orelli, F. Fiorini, M. Spaziani, O. Tintisona, & M. Picchio. (2018). Pre-operative skin antisepsis with chlorhexidine gluconate and povidone-iodine to prevent port-site infection in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective study. Surgical Infections, 19(3), 334-338. DOI : 10.1089/sur.2017.269   DOI
10 J. C. Dumville, E. McFarlane, P. Edwards, A. Lipp & A. Holmes. (2013). Preoperative skin antiseptics for preventing surgical wound infections after clean surgery. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (3). DOI : 10.1002/14651858.CD003949.pub3
11 H. Laufman. (1989). Current use of skin and wound cleansers and antiseptics. The American journal of surgery, 157(3), 359-365.   DOI
12 J. Zinn, J. B. Jenkins, V. Swofford, B. Harrelson & S. McCarter. (2010). Intraoperative patient skin prep agents: is there a difference?. AORN Journal, 92(6), 662-674. DOI : 10.1016/j.aorn.2010.07.016   DOI
13 R. O. Darouiche, M. J. Wall Jr, K. M. Itani, M. F. Otterson, A. L. Webb, M. M. Carrick, & A. AlSharif. (2010). Chlorhexidine-alcohol versus povidone-iodine for surgical-site antisepsis. New England Journal of Medicine, 362(1), 18-26. DOI : 10.1056/NEJMoa0810988   DOI
14 T. Kunisada, K. Yamada, S. Oda & O. Hara. (1997). Investigation on the efficacy of povidone-iodine against antiseptic-resistant species. Dermatology, 195(Suppl. 2), 14-18.   DOI
15 A. Noorani, N. Rabey, S. R. Walsh & R. J. Davies. (2010). Systematic review and meta‐analysis of preoperative antisepsis with chlorhexidine versus povidone-iodine in clean‐contaminated surgery. British Journal of Surgery, 97(11), 1614-1620. DOI : 10.1002/bjs.7214   DOI
16 T. Yasuda, Y. Yoshimura, H. Takada, S. Kawaguchi, M. Ito, F. Yamazaki, & Y. Asano. (1997). Comparison of bactericidal effects of commonly used antiseptics against pathogens causing nosocomial infections. Dermatology, 195(Suppl. 2), 19-28.   DOI
17 A. P. Kulkarni & R. M. Awode. (2013). A prospective randomised trial to compare the efficacy of povidone-iodine 10% and chlorhexidine 2% for skin disinfection. Indian Journal of Anaesthesia, 57(3), 270. DOI : 10.4103/0019-5049.115619   DOI