-
AORN Journal Jun 2022
Meta-Analysis
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Chlorhexidine; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Povidone-Iodine; Preoperative Care; Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed: 35616454
DOI: 10.1002/aorn.13696 -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Aug 2021Chemical pleurodesis is an important option for palliation in malignant pleural effusion (MPE). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Chemical pleurodesis is an important option for palliation in malignant pleural effusion (MPE).
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the status of iodopovidone for pleurodesis in MPE.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of PubMed and EMBASE databases to identify studies evaluating the role of iodopovidone for pleurodesis in MPE. We calculated the pooled success rate of iodopovidone pleurodesis from observational studies and the risk ratio (RR) of successful pleurodesis (compared to other agents) from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We pooled the data using the random-effects model. We also assessed the safety of iodopovidone.
RESULTS
We included 26 studies (n = 1132, 15 observational, and 11 RCTs) in our review. The pooled success rate (95% confidence interval [CI]) from 15 observational studies (n = 648) was 90% (86-94). The efficacy rate of iodopovidone was similar with either tube thoracostomy or thoracoscopy. Eleven (n = 484) RCTs compared the efficacy of iodopovidone with other agents (especially bleomycin and talc). We found a similar success rate of iodopovidone compared to other agents with a pooled RR (95% CI) of 0.99 (0.91-1.08). The most frequent adverse event was chest pain. No hypo or hyperthyroidism, or visual disturbance was encountered in any study. There were no deaths attributed to iodopovidone use.
CONCLUSIONS
Iodopovidone is a safe and effective agent for pleurodesis in the management of MPE. Further confirmation is required since the available evidence is limited by the low quality and small sample size of the included studies.
Topics: Aged; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Pleural Effusion, Malignant; Pleurodesis; Povidone-Iodine
PubMed: 33515303
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-021-06004-3 -
AORN Journal Oct 2020
Meta-Analysis
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Bandages; Chlorhexidine; Humans; Povidone-Iodine; Skin; Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed: 32990965
DOI: 10.1002/aorn.13197 -
American Journal of Obstetrics and... Sep 2019Direct comparison metaanalyses have reported benefits with presurgical vaginal preparation before cesarean delivery for the reduction of endometritis. These reports did... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Direct comparison metaanalyses have reported benefits with presurgical vaginal preparation before cesarean delivery for the reduction of endometritis. These reports did not perform a multitreatment comparison of the various antiseptic solutions assessed in previous studies.
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study was to review the literature systematically and quantitate and summarize indirectly the comparative efficacy of antiseptic formulations and their concentrations that are used for the preparation of the vagina before cesarean delivery in the prevention of endometritis and other infectious complications.
STUDY DESIGN
We used MEDLINE, EMBASE (from their inception to November 2018) and Cochrane databases, biographies, and conference proceedings. We used randomized clinical trials of patients who underwent surgical preparation of the vagina with antiseptic formulations before cesarean delivery with the aim of reducing the risk of infectious morbidity. Our systematic review was registered and followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Extension for network meta-analysis guidelines. Network meta-analysis was performed with computerized software and used user-written programs to assess consistency, inconsistency, ranking probabilities, and graphing results. Direct and indirect pairwise comparisons of the various formulations and their concentrations were performed with the use of multivariate random-effects models and metaregression. A frequentist inference method was employed for the fitted model to estimate the ranking probabilities. Subgroup analyses for patients in labor, not in labor, and with ruptured membranes were conducted.
RESULTS
For the prevention of endometritis, we identified 23 studies that comprised 7097 women who were allocated to the following treatments: povidone-iodine (1%, 5%, 10%), chlorhexidine (0.2%, 0.4%), metronidazole gel, cetrimide, or normal saline solution/no treatment. Direct and indirect pairwise comparisons indicated that, when compared with saline solution or no treatment, all antiseptic formulations decreased rates of endometritis (5.2% vs 9.1%; odds ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.35-0.65; 22 studies/6994 women). Individually, povidone-iodine (odds ratio, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.64; 16 studies/5968 women), cetrimide (odds ratio, 0.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.90; 1 study/200 women), and metronidazole (odds ratio, 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.16-0.90; 1 study/224 women) significantly reduced the risk of endometritis. Rankings of vaginal preparations indicated that povidone-iodine 1% had the highest probability (72.7%) of being the most effective treatment for the prevention of endometritis. For the secondary outcomes of postoperative wound infection and fever, a significant reduction was found only with povidone-iodine (odds ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.78; 16 studies/5968 women; and odds ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-0.83; 12 studies/4667 women). Subgroup analyses also found that povidone-iodine significantly reduced risk of endometritis for women in labor (odds ratio, 0.42; 95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.88; 5 studies/1211 women), with ruptured membranes(odds ratio, 0.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-0.44; 4 studies/476 women), and undergoing planned cesarean delivery (odds ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.27-0.57; 8 studies/1825 women).
CONCLUSION
Among patients who underwent cesarean delivery, presurgical vaginal irrigation with povidone-iodine had the highest probability of reducing the risk of endometritis, postoperative wound infections, and fever.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Cesarean Section; Cetrimonium; Chlorhexidine; Endometritis; Female; Humans; Metronidazole; Network Meta-Analysis; Povidone-Iodine
PubMed: 30954518
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.04.002 -
World Journal of Urology Feb 2023Clean intermittent catheterization (CIC) is associated with an increased risk of urinary tract infections (UTI), urethral trauma, urethral stenosis, hematuria, and pain.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Clean intermittent catheterization (CIC) is associated with an increased risk of urinary tract infections (UTI), urethral trauma, urethral stenosis, hematuria, and pain. The first catheters were developed of polyvinyl carbon (PVC). Several types of catheters have been developed to reduce these complications, such as those with hydrophilic coating.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of hydrophilic coated catheters compared to uncoated catheters on the rate of UTI in patients using CIC.
METHODOLOGY
A systematic literature search was performed in OVID, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and CENTRAL databases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or randomized crossover trials comparing UTI and hematuria rates in patients using hydrophilic vs. non-hydrophilic catheters for CIC were identified. The selected trials were evaluated for risk of bias using the "Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2)." The results were expressed as a risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI), under a random-effects model. Data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.4 software.
RESULTS
Nine studies with a total of 525 patients in CIC were analyzed. Overall, the use of hydrophilic catheters had a lower risk of UTIs compared to uncoated catheters (RR = 0.78; 95% CI 0.62-0.97; I = 37%). Five of the studies include patients > 18 years, showing a reduction of UTIs with the use of hydrophilic catheters (RR = 0.83; 95% CI 0.74-0.93; I = 0%). There was no difference in UTI development when comparing single-use uncoated vs hydrophilic catheters. However, heterogeneity was high (RR = 0.77; 95% CI 0.59-1.00; I = 57%). Regarding hematuria risk reduction, we were unable to identify differences between the use of hydrophilic catheters compared to uncoated catheters (RR = 1.02; 95% CI 0.66-1.60).
CONCLUSION
We found a risk reduction of UTIs associated with using hydrophilic catheters in adults, with low heterogeneity. Regarding hematuria, significant differences were not proved. We do not find a significant difference in UTI risk reduction in the pediatric population. Urethral trauma presence could not be meta-analyzed due to a lack of information reported.
Topics: Child; Adult; Humans; Intermittent Urethral Catheterization; Urinary Catheterization; Hematuria; Catheters; Urinary Tract Infections; Urinary Catheters
PubMed: 36547679
DOI: 10.1007/s00345-022-04235-5 -
Acta Ophthalmologica Nov 2023
Meta-Analysis
Topics: Humans; Povidone-Iodine; Network Meta-Analysis; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Conjunctivitis, Viral
PubMed: 37130094
DOI: 10.1111/aos.15689 -
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Aug 2022The greater likelihood of morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stays and poorer long-term outcomes as a result of surgical site infections secondary to spinal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The greater likelihood of morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stays and poorer long-term outcomes as a result of surgical site infections secondary to spinal surgery makes prophylactic measures an imperative focus. Therefore, the aim of this review was to evaluate the available research related to the efficacy of different intraoperative irrigation techniques used in spinal surgery for surgical site infection (SSI) prophylaxis.
METHODS
We performed a comprehensive search using Ovid Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane library pertaining to this topic. Our meta-analysis was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. The inclusion criteria consist of spine surgeries with intraoperative use of any wound irrigation technique, comparison groups with a different intraoperative irrigation technique or no irrigation, SSI identified with bacterial cultures or clinically in the postoperative period, reported SSI rates. Data extracted from eligible studies included, but was not limited to, SSI rates, irrigation technique and control technique. Exclusion criteria consist of articles with no human subjects, reviews, meta-analyses and case control studies and no details about SSI identification or rates. Pooled risk ratios were calculated. A meta-analysis was performed with a forest plot to determine risk estimates' heterogeneity with I index, Q-statistic, and p value under a random-effects model. Funnel plot was used to assess publication bias. All databases were last checked on January, 2022. PROBAST tool was used to assess both risk of bias and applicability concerns.
RESULTS
After reviewing 1494 titles and abstracts, 18 articles met inclusion criteria. They included three prospective randomized-controlled trials, 13 retrospective cohort studies, two prospective cohort studies. There were 54 (1.8%) cases of SSIs in the povidone-iodine irrigation group (N = 2944) compared to 159 (4.6%) in the control group (N = 3408). Using intraoperative povidone-iodine wound irrigation produced an absolute risk reduction of 2.8%. Overall risk ratio was 0.32 (95% CI 0.20-0.53, p < 0.00001). In a global analysis, study heterogeneity and synthesizing mostly retrospective data were primary limitations.
CONCLUSION
The most evidence exists for povidone-iodine and has Level 2 evidence supporting SSI reduction during spinal surgery. Other antiseptic solutions such as dilute chlorhexidine lack published evidence in this patient population which limits the ability to draw conclusions related to its use in spinal surgery.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
II - Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.
Topics: Humans; Povidone-Iodine; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Surgical Wound Infection; Therapeutic Irrigation
PubMed: 36008858
DOI: 10.1186/s12891-022-05763-2 -
BJS Open Sep 2022A combination of chlorhexidine gluconate and alcohol (CHG-alcohol) is recommended for surgical skin preparation to prevent surgical site infection (SSI). Although more... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
A combination of chlorhexidine gluconate and alcohol (CHG-alcohol) is recommended for surgical skin preparation to prevent surgical site infection (SSI). Although more than 1 per cent CHG-alcohol is recommended to prevent catheter-related bloodstream infections, there is no consensus regarding the concentration of the CHG compound for the prevention of SSI.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. Four electronic databases were searched on 5 November 2020. SSI rates were compared between CHG-alcohol and povidone-iodine (PVP-I) according to the concentration of CHG (0.5 per cent, 2.0 per cent, 2.5 per cent, and 4.0 per cent).
RESULTS
In total, 106 of 2716 screened articles were retrieved for full-text review. The risk ratios (RRs) of SSI for 0.5 per cent (6 studies) and 2.0 per cent (4 studies) CHG-alcohol were significantly lower than those for PVP-I (RR = 0.71, 95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 0.52 to 0.97; RR = 0.52, 95 per cent c.i 0.31 to 0.86 respectively); however, no significant difference was observed in the compounds with a CHG concentration of more than 2.0 per cent.
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis is the first study that clarifies the usefulness of an alcohol-based CHG solution with a 0.5 per cent or higher CHG concentration for surgical skin preparation to prevent SSI.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Chlorhexidine; Ethanol; Humans; Povidone-Iodine; Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed: 36124902
DOI: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrac111 -
Journal of Wound Care Feb 2022To compare the effectiveness of antiseptic solutions to that of non-antiseptic solutions in reducing wound infection rate, reducing bacterial load and improving wound...
OBJECTIVE
To compare the effectiveness of antiseptic solutions to that of non-antiseptic solutions in reducing wound infection rate, reducing bacterial load and improving wound healing.
METHOD
We searched PubMed MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), ProQuest Medical Database and medRxiv for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing antiseptic solutions with non-antiseptic solutions in simple, uncomplicated acute traumatic wounds. Qualitative data synthesis was employed. Risk of bias was assessed and GRADE assessment was used to evaluate quality of evidence.
RESULTS
In this systematic review, four studies with a total of 875 participants were included, of which two studies showed a significant reduction of wound infection rate using povidone-iodine (p=0.001 and p=0.03). The use of non-antiseptic solutions significantly increased bacterial load on acute traumatic wounds (p=0.0001). The quality of evidence was very low. No studies reported on wound healing outcome.
CONCLUSION
No robust conclusions can be implemented in clinical practice. Future studies are needed to compare the use of antiseptic and non-antiseptic solutions in acute traumatic wounds.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Humans; Povidone-Iodine; Wound Healing; Wound Infection
PubMed: 35148627
DOI: 10.12968/jowc.2022.31.2.162 -
Infection Control and Hospital... Jan 2020Cutaneous antisepsis with chlorhexidine or povidone-iodine, usually with alcohol, has been extensively studied. This review of published studies reveals that sequential...
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.
Topics: Administration, Cutaneous; Alcohols; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Bacteria, Aerobic; Bacteria, Anaerobic; Bacterial Load; Catheter-Related Infections; Chlorhexidine; Humans; Povidone-Iodine; Skin; Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed: 31619301
DOI: 10.1017/ice.2019.287