Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2024

Abstract

Antiseptic preparation of surgical sites is known to reduce the rate of infective complications. However, surgical site infections (SSI) remain a leading cause of post-operative hospitalizations, increasing patient stress and cost for the healthcare system.1-7 In gynecologic surgery, preparation of the vagina is performed to reduce bacterial load prior to surgery, though it is known to remain contaminated.3 In the US, only solutions containing povidone-iodine (PI) are FDA approved for vaginal preparation; though, a 2018 ACOG Practice Bulletin lists chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) with low (<4%) alcohol concentrations as a reasonable option for off-label use.3 Other preparations for vaginal surgery have been reported including baby shampoo (BS) and a commercially available preparation, containing PCMX (para-chloro-meta-xylenol, Techni-care®, chloroxylenol), that is marketed specifically for use with mucous membranes.8-12 There is a growing need to establish evidence-based alternatives to iodine for vaginal preparation for patients with allergies or sensitivity to iodine-containing products while minimizing postoperative irritation. One retrospective study comparing BS to PI in gynecologic surgeries showed a non-significant lower rate of surgical site infection with BS.9 One major challenge for determining effectiveness of surgical scrubs for reducing SSI is the relatively rare occurrence of postoperative infection. As an alternative proxy for infection colony counts of bacteria/fungi, before and after preparation, have been used.12,13 BS has been shown to reduce bacterial loads in non-gynecologic surgery, but there is limited data regarding its use in vaginal surgery, even though surgeons have been using BS in cases of iodine allergy or intolerance to other antiseptics.9-12CHG use in vaginal surgery has been debated due to concerns about vaginal irritation, however studies have demonstrated that alteration of the solution to 2-4% chlorhexidine with low (4%) alcohol concentration was associated with mild to no vaginal irritation. CHG showed similar reduction in post-incision bacterial counts and wound infections in cesarean delivery, and reduced colony counts during hysterectomy (when compared to PI).14-20 PCMX and CHG were shown to significantly reduce bacterial colonization of extracted root canals, and PCMX has been marketed specifically for vaginal antiseptic preparation.21 While some information on the effectiveness of these four antiseptic preparations has been documented in the literature, at this time there are no randomized controlled trials comparing these solutions in the context of vaginal surgery. Further evaluation and research of antiseptic solutions is warranted to provide evidence for best practices in minimizing infection and irritation. The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of three antiseptic solutions with the standard, PI, for reducing bacterial colonies as a proxy for SSI, and to assess postoperative irritation and infection symptoms.

Download


Share

COinS