Cargando…

Comparison of olanexidine versus povidone‐iodine as a preoperative antiseptic for reducing surgical site infection in both scheduled and emergency gastrointestinal surgeries: A single‐center randomized clinical trial

AIM: Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most common postoperative complications in gastrointestinal surgery. To clarify the superiority of 1.5% olanexidine, we conducted a randomized prospective clinical trial that enrolled patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery with operative wound c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Umemura, Akira, Sasaki, Akira, Fujiwara, Hisataka, Harada, Kazuho, Amano, Satoshi, Takahashi, Naoto, Tanahashi, Yota, Suto, Takayuki
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10472373/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37663968
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ags3.12675
_version_ 1785100062364270592
author Umemura, Akira
Sasaki, Akira
Fujiwara, Hisataka
Harada, Kazuho
Amano, Satoshi
Takahashi, Naoto
Tanahashi, Yota
Suto, Takayuki
author_facet Umemura, Akira
Sasaki, Akira
Fujiwara, Hisataka
Harada, Kazuho
Amano, Satoshi
Takahashi, Naoto
Tanahashi, Yota
Suto, Takayuki
author_sort Umemura, Akira
collection PubMed
description AIM: Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most common postoperative complications in gastrointestinal surgery. To clarify the superiority of 1.5% olanexidine, we conducted a randomized prospective clinical trial that enrolled patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery with operative wound classes II–IV. METHODS: To evaluate the efficacy of 1.5% olanexidine in preventing SSIs relative to 10% povidone‐iodine, we enrolled 298 patients in each group. The primary outcome was a 30‐day SSI, and the secondary outcomes were incidences of superficial and deep incisional SSI and organ/space SSI. In addition, subgroup analyses were performed. RESULTS: The primary outcome of the overall 30‐day SSI occurred in 38 cases (12.8%) in the 1.5% olanexidine group and in 53 cases (18.0%) in the 10% povidone‐iodine group (adjusted risk ratio: 0.716, 95% confidence interval: 0.495–1.057, p = 0.083). Organ/space SSI occurred in 18 cases (6.1%) in the 1.5% olanexidine group and in 31 cases (10.5%) in the 10% povidone‐iodine group, with a significant difference (adjusted risk ratio: 0.587, 95% confidence interval: 0.336–0.992, p = 0.049). Subgroup analyses revealed that SSI incidences were comparable in scheduled surgery (relative risk: 0.809, 95% confidence interval: 0.522–1.254) and operative wound class II (relative risk: 0.756, 95% confidence interval: 0.494–1.449) in 1.5% olanexidine group. CONCLUSION: Our study revealed that 1.5% olanexidine reduced the 30‐day overall SSI; however, the result was not significant. Organ/space SSI significantly decreased in the 1.5% olanexidine group. Our results indicate that 1.5% olanexidine has the potential to prevent SSI on behalf of povidone‐iodine.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10472373
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104723732023-09-02 Comparison of olanexidine versus povidone‐iodine as a preoperative antiseptic for reducing surgical site infection in both scheduled and emergency gastrointestinal surgeries: A single‐center randomized clinical trial Umemura, Akira Sasaki, Akira Fujiwara, Hisataka Harada, Kazuho Amano, Satoshi Takahashi, Naoto Tanahashi, Yota Suto, Takayuki Ann Gastroenterol Surg Original Articles AIM: Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most common postoperative complications in gastrointestinal surgery. To clarify the superiority of 1.5% olanexidine, we conducted a randomized prospective clinical trial that enrolled patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery with operative wound classes II–IV. METHODS: To evaluate the efficacy of 1.5% olanexidine in preventing SSIs relative to 10% povidone‐iodine, we enrolled 298 patients in each group. The primary outcome was a 30‐day SSI, and the secondary outcomes were incidences of superficial and deep incisional SSI and organ/space SSI. In addition, subgroup analyses were performed. RESULTS: The primary outcome of the overall 30‐day SSI occurred in 38 cases (12.8%) in the 1.5% olanexidine group and in 53 cases (18.0%) in the 10% povidone‐iodine group (adjusted risk ratio: 0.716, 95% confidence interval: 0.495–1.057, p = 0.083). Organ/space SSI occurred in 18 cases (6.1%) in the 1.5% olanexidine group and in 31 cases (10.5%) in the 10% povidone‐iodine group, with a significant difference (adjusted risk ratio: 0.587, 95% confidence interval: 0.336–0.992, p = 0.049). Subgroup analyses revealed that SSI incidences were comparable in scheduled surgery (relative risk: 0.809, 95% confidence interval: 0.522–1.254) and operative wound class II (relative risk: 0.756, 95% confidence interval: 0.494–1.449) in 1.5% olanexidine group. CONCLUSION: Our study revealed that 1.5% olanexidine reduced the 30‐day overall SSI; however, the result was not significant. Organ/space SSI significantly decreased in the 1.5% olanexidine group. Our results indicate that 1.5% olanexidine has the potential to prevent SSI on behalf of povidone‐iodine. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-04-16 /pmc/articles/PMC10472373/ /pubmed/37663968 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ags3.12675 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Annals of Gastroenterological Surgery published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of The Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Umemura, Akira
Sasaki, Akira
Fujiwara, Hisataka
Harada, Kazuho
Amano, Satoshi
Takahashi, Naoto
Tanahashi, Yota
Suto, Takayuki
Comparison of olanexidine versus povidone‐iodine as a preoperative antiseptic for reducing surgical site infection in both scheduled and emergency gastrointestinal surgeries: A single‐center randomized clinical trial
title Comparison of olanexidine versus povidone‐iodine as a preoperative antiseptic for reducing surgical site infection in both scheduled and emergency gastrointestinal surgeries: A single‐center randomized clinical trial
title_full Comparison of olanexidine versus povidone‐iodine as a preoperative antiseptic for reducing surgical site infection in both scheduled and emergency gastrointestinal surgeries: A single‐center randomized clinical trial
title_fullStr Comparison of olanexidine versus povidone‐iodine as a preoperative antiseptic for reducing surgical site infection in both scheduled and emergency gastrointestinal surgeries: A single‐center randomized clinical trial
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of olanexidine versus povidone‐iodine as a preoperative antiseptic for reducing surgical site infection in both scheduled and emergency gastrointestinal surgeries: A single‐center randomized clinical trial
title_short Comparison of olanexidine versus povidone‐iodine as a preoperative antiseptic for reducing surgical site infection in both scheduled and emergency gastrointestinal surgeries: A single‐center randomized clinical trial
title_sort comparison of olanexidine versus povidone‐iodine as a preoperative antiseptic for reducing surgical site infection in both scheduled and emergency gastrointestinal surgeries: a single‐center randomized clinical trial
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10472373/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37663968
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ags3.12675
work_keys_str_mv AT umemuraakira comparisonofolanexidineversuspovidoneiodineasapreoperativeantisepticforreducingsurgicalsiteinfectioninbothscheduledandemergencygastrointestinalsurgeriesasinglecenterrandomizedclinicaltrial
AT sasakiakira comparisonofolanexidineversuspovidoneiodineasapreoperativeantisepticforreducingsurgicalsiteinfectioninbothscheduledandemergencygastrointestinalsurgeriesasinglecenterrandomizedclinicaltrial
AT fujiwarahisataka comparisonofolanexidineversuspovidoneiodineasapreoperativeantisepticforreducingsurgicalsiteinfectioninbothscheduledandemergencygastrointestinalsurgeriesasinglecenterrandomizedclinicaltrial
AT haradakazuho comparisonofolanexidineversuspovidoneiodineasapreoperativeantisepticforreducingsurgicalsiteinfectioninbothscheduledandemergencygastrointestinalsurgeriesasinglecenterrandomizedclinicaltrial
AT amanosatoshi comparisonofolanexidineversuspovidoneiodineasapreoperativeantisepticforreducingsurgicalsiteinfectioninbothscheduledandemergencygastrointestinalsurgeriesasinglecenterrandomizedclinicaltrial
AT takahashinaoto comparisonofolanexidineversuspovidoneiodineasapreoperativeantisepticforreducingsurgicalsiteinfectioninbothscheduledandemergencygastrointestinalsurgeriesasinglecenterrandomizedclinicaltrial
AT tanahashiyota comparisonofolanexidineversuspovidoneiodineasapreoperativeantisepticforreducingsurgicalsiteinfectioninbothscheduledandemergencygastrointestinalsurgeriesasinglecenterrandomizedclinicaltrial
AT sutotakayuki comparisonofolanexidineversuspovidoneiodineasapreoperativeantisepticforreducingsurgicalsiteinfectioninbothscheduledandemergencygastrointestinalsurgeriesasinglecenterrandomizedclinicaltrial