Volume 3, Issue 1 (1-2018)                   hrjbaq 2018, 3(1): 9-15 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Ebrahimi A, Mohammadian M, Drayabor M, Rasooli H. Assessment of the Results and Complications of the Chlorhexidine–Alcohol in Non-Emergency Abdominal Surgery . hrjbaq. 2018; 3 (1) :9-15
URL: http://hrjbaq.ir/article-1-116-en.html
Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , (ae_49341@yahoo.com)
Abstract:   (1221 Views)

Introduction: During surgery, the first and most important part of the body defense, skin barrier broked. Microorganisms can be located easily into the tissues and internal organs. Due to the limited studies in comparing the results and complications of surgical disinfection with or without chlorhexidine-alcohol spray in non-emergency abdominal surgery, this study was conducted.
Materials and Methods: The patients that undergoing elective abdominal surgery in baqiyatallah hospital (including  cholecystectomy, gastrectomy, resection of the small intestine and colectomy) after obtaining informed consent, were recruited into the project. Prior to surgery, chlorhexidine was used as a spray in a cutting site. After the surgery was completed in the abdomen and before the skin was closed, an incision was taken from the edge of the surgical cutting edge with a swab for culture. Samples were transferred to the laboratory and bacterial mass count (Kant's colony) was performed. For the mean quantitative variables, standard deviation was calculated and for qualitative variables, number and percentage were reported. The data were analyzed using SPSS 20 software.  
Results: A total of 97 people were disinfected and evaluated. Of the total number, 5 (5.1%) of the cases were developed infection and 5 (5.1%) had a mass of staphylococcus epidermidis.

Conclusion: Due to the low number of infections and the ease of use and rapid disinfection of the site of operation by chlorhexidine, the using of this method in abdominal surgery is recommended.

Full-Text [PDF 552 kb]   (281 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special
Received: 2016/12/26 | Revised: 2018/11/7 | Accepted: 2017/05/8 | ePublished ahead of print: 2018/01/15 | Published: 2018/01/15

References
1. Jones HW, Rock JA, TeLinde RW. Te Linde's operative gynecology: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2003.
2. Murray PR, Rosenthal KS, Pfaller MA. Medical microbiology: Mosby; 1994.
3. Gerg Beilman J, Duvn D. Principles of surgery. 10th ed2015.
4. Townsend C, Beauchamp R, Evers B, Mattox K. Sabiston Textbook of Surgery. Expert Consult Premium Edition ed: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2013.
5. Dirschl DR, Wilson FC. Topical antibiotic irrigation in the prophylaxis of operative wound infections in orthopedic surgery. Orthop Clin North Am. 1991;22(3):419-26. pmid: 1852419
6. Lizan-Garcia M, Garcia-Caballero J, Asensio-Vegas A. Risk factors for surgical-wound infection in general surgery: a prospective study. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1997;18(5):310-5. pmid: 9154472
7. Drosou A, Falabella A, Kirsner RS. Antiseptics on wounds: an area of controversy. Wounds. 2003;15(5):149-66.
8. Niedner R. Cytotoxicity and sensitization of povidone-iodine and other frequently used anti-infective agents. Dermatology. 1997;195 Suppl 2:89-92. doi: 10.1159/000246038 pmid: 9403263
9. Abbas M. [Race in the translation of manuals surgery Washington]. Tehran lofty idea; 2013.
10. 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. doi: 10.1086/657134 pmid: 20969449
11. Darouiche RO, Wall MJ, Jr., 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. doi: 10.1056/NEJM oa0810988 pmid: 20054046
12. Culligan PJ, Kubik K, Murphy M, Blackwell L, Snyder J. A randomized trial that compared povidone iodine and chlorhexidine as antiseptics for vaginal hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192(2):422-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.08.010 pmid: 15695981
13. Khatami M, Fanaei A. [the comparison between the two skin preparation procedures in abdominal surgery]. Kosar J. 2013;2(6).
14. Yeung LL, Grewal S, Bullock A, Lai HH, Brandes SB. A comparison of chlorhexidine-alcohol versus povidone-iodine for eliminating skin flora before genitourinary prosthetic surgery: a randomized controlled trial. J Urol. 2013;189(1):136-40. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.08.086 pmid: 23164373
15. Menderes G, Athar Ali N, Aagaard K, Sangi-Haghpeykar H. Chlorhexidine-alcohol compared with povidone-iodine for surgical-site antisepsis in cesarean deliveries. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120(5):1037-44. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31826f3bd9 pmid: 23090520
16. 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. doi: 10.1007/s00595-014-1078-y pmid: 25381486

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA code

Send email to the article author


© 2018 All Rights Reserved | Health Research Journal

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb