Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-05T10:51:27.586Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sequential use of povidone-iodine and chlorhexidine for cutaneous antisepsis: A systematic review

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 October 2019

Leonard A. Mermel Open the ORCID record for Leonard A. Mermel [Opens in a new window]
Leonard A. Mermel*
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island Division of Infectious Diseases, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island Department of Epidemiology and Infection Control, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island
*
Author for correspondence: Leonard Mermel, Email: lmermel@lifespan.org
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cutaneous antisepsis with chlorhexidine or povidone-iodine, usually with alcohol, has been extensively studied. This review of published studies reveals that sequential use of povidone-iodine and chlorhexidine leads to a greater reduction in the bioburden of aerobic and anaerobic bacteria on the skin, lower risk of intravascular catheter colonization, and lower risk of surgical site infection compared to use of either agent alone. As such, sequential use of cutaneous antiseptic agents may further reduce risk of surgical site infections, as well as infections associated with insertion of transdermal devices such as nephrostomy tubes, left-ventricular assistance devices, and intravascular catheters.

Type
Review
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 41 , Issue 1 , January 2020 , pp. 98 - 101
Copyright
© 2019 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved. 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

McDonnell, G, Russell, AD. Antiseptics and disinfectants: activity, action, and resistance. Clin Microbiol Rev 1999;12:147–179.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McInnes, MDF, Moher, D, Thombs, BD, et al. Preferred reporting items for a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies: the PRISMA-DTA statement. JAMA 2018;319:388–396.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sellers, J, Newman, JH. Disinfection of the umbilicus for abdominal surgery. Lancet 1971;2:1276–1278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
May, SR, Roberts, DP, DeClement, FA, Still, JM Jr. Reduced bacteria on transplantable allograft skin after preparation with chlorhexidine gluconate, povidone-iodine, and isopropanol. J Burn Care Rehabil 1991;12:224–228.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ngai, IM, Van Arsdale, A, Govindappagari, S, et al. Skin preparation for prevention of surgical site infection after cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2015;126:1251–1257.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patrick, S, McDowell, A, Lee, A, et al. Antisepsis of the skin before spinal surgery with povidone iodine-alcohol followed by chlorhexidine gluconate-alcohol versus povidone iodine-alcohol applied twice for the prevention of contamination of the wound by bacteria: a randomised controlled trial. Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1354–1365.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Langgartner, J, Linde, HJ, Lehn, N, et al. Combined skin disinfection with chlorhexidine/propanol and aqueous povidone-iodine reduces bacterial colonisation of central venous catheters. Intensive Care Med 2004;30:1081–1088.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guzel, A, Ozekinci, T, Ozkan, U, et al. Evaluation of the skin flora after chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine preparation in neurosurgical practice. Surg Neurol 2009;71:207–210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blonna, D, Allizond, V, Bellato, E, et al. Single versus double skin preparation for infection prevention in proximal humeral fracture surgery. Biomed Res Int 2018;2018:8509527. doi: 10.1155/2018/8509527.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davies, BM, Patel, HC. Does chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine preoperative antisepsis reduce surgical site infection in cranial neurosurgery? Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2016;98:405–408.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davies, BM, Patel, HC. Systematic review and meta-analysis of preoperative antisepsis with combination chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine. Surg J (N Y) 2016;2:e70–e77.Google ScholarPubMed
Anderson, MJ, Horn, ME, Lin, YC, et al. Efficacy of concurrent application of chlorhexidine gluconate and povidone iodine against six nosocomial pathogens. Am J Infect Control 2010;38:826–831.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marschall, J, Mermel, LA, Fakih, M, et al. Strategies to prevent central-line–associated bloodstream infections in acute care hospitals: 2014 update. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2014;35:753–771.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cronquist, AB, Jakob, K, Lai, L, Della Latta, P, Larson, EL. Relationship between skin microbial counts and surgical site infection after neurosurgery. Clin Infec Dis 2001;33:1302–1308.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tschudin-Sutter, S, Frei, R, Egli-Gany, D, et al. No risk of surgical site infections from residual bacteria after disinfection with povidone-iodine-alcohol in 1,014 cases: a prospective observational study. Ann Surg 2012;255:565–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casey, AL, Karpanen, TJ, Conway, BR, et al. Enhanced chlorhexidine skin penetration with 1,8-cineole. BMC Infect Dis 2017;17:350. doi: 10.1186/s12879-017-2451-4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kolakowski, L, Lai, JK, Duvall, GT, et al. Neer Award 2018: benzoyl peroxide effectively decreases preoperative Cutibacterium acnes shoulder burden: a prospective randomized controlled trial. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2018;27:1539–1544.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed