Efficacy of surgical skin preparation solutions in hip arthroplasty: a prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND: The use of an effective antimicrobial preoperative skin preparation solution is essential in preventing infections after surgery, but the findings in the literature regarding efficacy are not necessarily applicable to surgery involving the hip. The purpose of the present study was twofold: 1) to examine the native bacteria on the skin at the hip and 2) to determine the efficacy of 2 surgical skin preparation solutions at eliminating bacteria from the hip site in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. METHODS: We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial in consecutive adult patients who underwent primary total hip arthroplasty at a single institution from October 2014 to December 2015. Each patient was randomly allocated to be treated with 1 of 2 commonly used surgical skin preparation solutions: ChloraPrep (2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 70% isopropyl alcohol) or DuraPrep (0.7% iodophor and 74% isopropyl alcohol). Aerobic and anaerobic samples were obtained for culture before skin preparation, immediately after skin preparation and after skin closure. RESULTS: Full data were obtained for 105 patients: 54 in the ChloraPrep group and 51 in the DuraPrep group. Staphylococcus epidermidis, Corynebacterium and Micrococcus luteus were the organisms most commonly isolated from the hip before skin preparation. Positive bacterial culture results were obtained in 50 patients (93%) in the ChloraPrep group and 48 patients (94%) in the DuraPrep group. Immediately after skin preparation, the overall proportion of positive culture results was significantly lower in the DuraPrep group than the ChloraPrep group (14% v. 35%, adjusted relative risk 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.18–0.85). After wound closure, there was no significant difference in the rate of positive culture results between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: DuraPrep was more effective than ChloraPrep at eliminating skin flora at the hip initially on application, but the 2 solutions were equally effective at the time of closure. Further study with larger samples is required to identify any influence of skin preparation solution on the incidence of prosthetic joint infection.