-
Journal of Orthopaedic Science :... Jan 2024Focus on reviewing a vigorous research effort to improve the safety profile of vancomycin powder (VP) and its optimal dose in reducing periprosthetic joint infection... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing intrawound vancomycin powder and povidone iodine lavage in the prevention of periprosthetic joint infection of hip and knee arthroplasties.
BACKGROUND
Focus on reviewing a vigorous research effort to improve the safety profile of vancomycin powder (VP) and its optimal dose in reducing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the need of the hour. This systematic review and meta-analysis attempt to explore the ongoing use of VP and VP + povidone iodine (PI) lavage to prevent PJI of hip/knee arthroplasties and highlights its challenges among the orthopedic community about the existence of the major organism and its frequency in total joint arthroplasty (TJA) patients.
METHODS
We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE databases regarding the outcomes of vancomycin powder (VP) and VP + povidone iodine (PI) combination in preventing periprosthetic joint infection of hip and knee arthroplasties.
RESULTS
In 5 of 7 studies, the combination of vancomycin powder (VP) and povidone iodine (PI) lavage have shown a lower risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in acute and high-risk hip and knee arthroplasties patients, with less or without serious adverse events and readmissions; while four of seven studies using VP-only found increasing rates of PJI in primary total knee arthroplasty and partial hip replacement in elderly patients with comorbidities, and significantly causes aseptic wound complications compared to the control group.
CONCLUSIONS
Intra-articular vancomycin powder (VP) and povidone iodine (PI) lavage showed a significant reduction of periprosthetic joint infection in primary and revision total joint arthroplasty. Before its widespread use in clinical settings, prospective randomized studies and, most importantly, its long-term efficacy and safety are recommended.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Vancomycin; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Povidone-Iodine; Powders; Therapeutic Irrigation; Prosthesis-Related Infections; Prospective Studies; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Arthritis, Infectious; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 36470703
DOI: 10.1016/j.jos.2022.11.013 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Nov 2022This systematic review sought to assess the efficacy of combining either sodium hypochlorite or povidone-iodine as disinfection solutions with non-surgical treatment of... (Review)
Review
This systematic review sought to assess the efficacy of combining either sodium hypochlorite or povidone-iodine as disinfection solutions with non-surgical treatment of periodontitis. An electronic search was conducted through PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and Google Scholar from inception until 10 September 2022. Outcomes included clinical outcomes (probing pocket depth, plaque index, clinical attachment level, relative-horizontal attachment level, bleeding on probing, gingival recession, the position of gingival margin) and biochemical (BAPNA level) properties. A subgroup analysis was conducted according to the assessment timepoint. Ten studies reporting the use of povidone-iodine and five studies reporting the use of sodium hypochlorite were included in this review. Overall, in the meta-analysis of povidone-iodine, no significant changes were noted in any of the assessed outcomes; however, minor changes were noted in probing pocket depth and clinical attachment level at a specific timepoint. Regarding sodium hypochlorite, a significant reduction in all clinical outcomes, except for bleeding on probing, was noted. In conclusion, the use of povidone-iodine does not result in an improvement in clinical outcomes, whereas sodium hypochlorite has promising properties that result in significant improvement in probing pocket depth and clinical attachment level. However, more studies are needed to confirm these observations.
PubMed: 36362818
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11216593 -
Journal of Neurosurgery. Pediatrics Jan 2023Postoperative infections in pediatric spinal surgery commonly occur and necessitate reoperation(s). However, pediatric-specific infection prophylaxis guidelines are not... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Postoperative infections in pediatric spinal surgery commonly occur and necessitate reoperation(s). However, pediatric-specific infection prophylaxis guidelines are not available. This network meta-analysis compares perioperative prophylaxis methods including Betadine irrigation, saline irrigation, intrawound vancomycin powder, combination therapy (Betadine, vancomycin, gentamicin, and cefuroxime), Betadine irrigation plus vancomycin powder, and no intervention to determine the most efficacious prevention method.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed by searching the PubMed, EBSCO, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for peer-reviewed articles published prior to February 2022 comparing two or more infection prophylaxis methods in patients younger than 22 years of age. Data were extracted for treatment modalities, patient demographics, and patient outcomes such as total number of infections, surgical site infections, deep infections, intraoperative blood loss, operative time, follow-up time, and postoperative complications. Quality and risk of bias was assessed using National Institutes of Health tools. A network meta-analysis was performed with reduction of infections as the primary outcome.
RESULTS
Overall, 10 studies consisting of 5164 procedures were included. There was no significant difference between prophylactic treatment options in reduction of infection. However, three treatment options showed significant reduction in total infection compared with no prophylactic treatment: Betadine plus vancomycin (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.09-0.54), vancomycin (OR 3.26, 95% CI 1.96-5.44), and a combination therapy (Betadine, vancomycin, gentamicin, and cefuroxime) (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.07-0.75). P-Score hierarchical ranking estimated Betadine plus vancomycin to be the superior treatment to prevent total infections, deep infections, and surgical site infections (P-score 0.7876, 0.7175, and 0.7291, respectively). No prophylaxis treatment-related complications were reported.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this network meta-analysis show the strongest support for Betadine plus vancomycin as a method to reduce infections following pediatric spinal surgery. There was heterogeneity among studies and inconsistent outcome reporting; however, three effective treatment options are identified.
Topics: Humans; Child; Vancomycin; Surgical Wound Infection; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Povidone-Iodine; Cefuroxime; Powders; Network Meta-Analysis; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Gentamicins
PubMed: 36308474
DOI: 10.3171/2022.9.PEDS22316 -
International Journal of Environmental... Sep 2022Severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a global and evolving pandemic associated with heavy health and financial burdens. Considering the oral... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a global and evolving pandemic associated with heavy health and financial burdens. Considering the oral cavity as the major reservoir for SARS-CoV-2, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess the efficacy of mouth rinses and nasal sprays in reducing the salivary viral load of SARS-CoV-2. All and studies that assessed the virucidal efficacy of mouth rinses and nasal sprays against SARS-CoV-2 and were published in the English language from December 2019 to April 2022 were considered for analyses. Special Medical Subject Headings terms were used to search Pubmed, Scopus, Embase Ovid, and Web of Science databases. The toxicological data reliability assessment tool (ToxRToool) was used to assess the quality of the included studies. Thirty-three studies (11 and 22 ) were deemed eligible for inclusion in this analysis. Results of the pooled data showed that povidone-iodine is the most efficacious intervention in terms of reducing the SARS-CoV-2 salivary viral load, followed by chlorhexidine. The mean difference in the viral load was 86% and 72%, respectively. Similarly, povidone-iodine was associated with the highest log reduction value (LRV) , followed by cetylpyridinium chloride, (LRV = 2.938 ( < 0.0005) and LRV = 2.907 ( = 0.009), respectively). Povidone-iodine-based oral and nasal preparations showed favourable results in terms of reducing SARS-CoV-2 viral loads both and . Considering the limited number of patients , further studies among larger cohorts are recommended.
Topics: COVID-19; Cetylpyridinium; Chlorhexidine; Humans; Mouthwashes; Nasal Sprays; Povidone-Iodine; Reproducibility of Results; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 36231450
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191912148 -
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 -
European Journal of Dentistry Jul 2023The efficacy of mouthwash for reducing the viral load in patients with the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains unclear. This systematic review and...
The efficacy of mouthwash for reducing the viral load in patients with the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis comprehensively examined the effects of chlorhexidine (CHX) and povidone-iodine (PVP-I) on the viral load in patients with COVID-19. We performed methodological analysis, systematic review, and meta-analysis of included studies using the Comprehensive Meta-analysis Software. PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ProQuest were searched from December 1, 2019, to December 2, 2021. In total, we included 10 studies of 1,339 patients with COVID-19. Compared with the control group, both CHX and PVP-I significantly reduced the number of negative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) results (<0.001) among COVID-19 patients. The CHX and PVP-I were effective on reducing the number of negative RT-PCR results in COVID-19 patients. Additional studies using adequate randomization methods and larger samples are warned.
PubMed: 36075270
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1753470 -
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 -
The Lancet. Microbe Oct 2022Surgical site infection (SSI) is the most common postoperative complication and substantially increases health-care costs. Published meta-analyses and international... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Surgical site infection (SSI) is the most common postoperative complication and substantially increases health-care costs. Published meta-analyses and international guidelines differ with regard to which preoperative skin antiseptic solution and concentration has the highest efficacy. We aimed to compare the efficacy of different skin preparation solutions and concentrations for the prevention of SSIs, and to provide an overview of current guidelines.
METHODS
This systematic review and network meta-analysis compared different preoperative skin antiseptics in the prevention of SSIs in adult patients undergoing surgery of any wound classification. We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL, published up to Nov 23, 2021, that directly compared two or more antiseptic agents (ie, chlorhexidine, iodine, or olanexidine) or concentrations in aqueous and alcohol-based solutions. We excluded paediatric, animal, and non-randomised studies, and studies not providing standard preoperative intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis. Studies with no SSIs in both groups were excluded from the quantitative analysis. Two reviewers screened and reviewed eligible full texts and extracted data. The primary outcome was the occurrence of SSI (ie, superficial, deep, and organ space). We conducted a frequentist random effects network meta-analysis to estimate the network effects of the skin preparation solutions on the prevention of SSIs. A risk-of-bias and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation assessment were done to determine the certainty of the evidence. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021293554.
FINDINGS
Overall, 2326 articles were identified, 33 studies were eligible for the systematic review, and 27 studies with 17 735 patients reporting 2144 SSIs (overall incidence of 12·1%) were included in the quantitative analysis. Only 2·0-2·5% chlorhexidine in alcohol (relative risk 0·75, 95% CI 0·61-0·92) and 1·5% olanexidine (0·49, 0·26-0·92) significantly reduced the rate of SSIs compared with aqueous iodine. For clean surgery, we found no difference in efficacy between different concentrations of chlorhexidine in alcohol. Seven RCTs were at high risk of bias, 24 had some concerns, and two had low risk of bias. Heterogeneity across the studies was moderate (I=27·5%), and netsplitting did not show inconsistencies between direct and indirect comparisons. Five of ten studies that mentioned adverse events related to the skin preparation solutions reported no adverse events, and five reported a total of 56 mild events (mainly erythema, pruritus, dermatitis, skin irritation, or mild allergic symptoms); none reported a substantial difference in adverse events between groups.
INTERPRETATION
For adult patients undergoing a surgical procedure of any wound classification, skin preparation using either 2·0-2·5% chlorhexidine in alcohol or 1·5% olanexidine is most effective in the prevention of SSIs. For clean surgery, no specific concentration of chlorhexidine in alcohol can be recommended. The efficacy of olanexidine was established by a single randomised trial and further investigation is needed.
FUNDING
Dutch Association for Quality Funds Medical Specialists.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Biguanides; Chlorhexidine; Ethanol; GRADE Approach; Humans; Incidence; Iodine; Network Meta-Analysis; Povidone-Iodine; Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed: 35985350
DOI: 10.1016/S2666-5247(22)00187-2 -
The Journal of Obstetrics and... Nov 2022We aimed to investigate the effect of various vaginal wash solutions on reducing risks of post-cesarean endometritis, wound infections, fever, and hospital stay duration. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIMS
We aimed to investigate the effect of various vaginal wash solutions on reducing risks of post-cesarean endometritis, wound infections, fever, and hospital stay duration.
METHODS
Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Cochrane Library were searched for randomized clinical trials that compared different vaginal wash solutions to each other or to "no vaginal cleaning"; without restriction on the age of parturients or site where trials were conducted. We analyzed this frequentist network meta-analysis using the netmeta package in R software version 4.1.2; synthesized data as mean difference or risk ratio with their 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS
Our network meta-analysis included 29 RCTs with a total sample size of 9311 women undergoing CS. Regarding post-cesarean endometritis, we found that povidone-iodine had the highest significant risk reduction compared to "no vaginal cleaning" (RR = 0.08, 95% CI [0.01, 0.69]). While regarding post-cesarean reduction of wound infection, fever, and hospital stay duration, we found that chlorhexidine 4% (RR = 0.17, 95% CI [0.05, 0.65]), saline 0.9% (RR = 0.12, 95% CI [0.03; 0.48]), and saline 0.9% (MD = -1.29, 95% CI [-2.18; -0.39]), respectively, had the highest significant risk reduction compared to "no vaginal cleaning."
CONCLUSION
Vaginal wash solutions were associated with a significant reduction of post-cesarean endometritis, wound infection, fever, and hospital stay duration. Since povidone-iodine had the highest significant reduction of post-cesarean endometritis, we recommend setting povidone-iodine as the standard practice as pre cesarean vaginal wash solution; consistent practice guidelines of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS).
Topics: Female; Pregnancy; Humans; Povidone-Iodine; Cesarean Section; Endometritis; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Network Meta-Analysis; Surgical Wound Infection; Postoperative Complications; Fever
PubMed: 35904080
DOI: 10.1111/jog.15377 -
BMC Pediatrics Jul 2022Surgical site infections (SSIs) in children represent a common and serious postoperative complication. Surgical skin preparation is an essential preventive measure in...
BACKGROUND
Surgical site infections (SSIs) in children represent a common and serious postoperative complication. Surgical skin preparation is an essential preventive measure in every surgical procedure. The most commonly used antiseptic agents for surgical skin preparation are chlorhexidine gluconate and iodophors in alcohol-based solutions. In adult patients the use of chlorhexidine-containing antiseptic solutions for preoperative skin preparation has been advocated to reduce SSI rates. Our objective was to conduct a systematic literature review on use of antiseptic agents for surgical skin preparation in children less than 16 years of age.
METHODS
A systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and CENTRAL was performed using both MeSH and free text terms and using the relevant Cochrane filter to identify full text randomized trials (RCTs) and comparative observational studies. Interventions of interest were the choice of main agent in antiseptic solutions (chlorhexidine/povidone-iodine/alcohol) compared with each other or with other antiseptic agents. Primary outcome was the reported rate of surgical site infections.
RESULTS
In total 8 studies were included in the review; 2 RCTs and 6 observational studies. Observational studies generally did not primarily investigate the association of different antiseptics with subsequent SSI. The identified randomised controlled trials included only 61 children in total, and were of low quality. Consequently, we did not conduct a formal meta-analysis. Since the publication of a comprehensive systematic review of perioperative measures for the prevention of SSI in 2016, no randomized controlled trials comparing antiseptic agents for surgical skin preparation in paediatric surgery have been conducted.
CONCLUSION
Robust evidence on the optimal skin antisepsis to reduce SSIs in children is lacking. Direct extrapolation of effects from trials involving adults is not appropriate as physiologic characteristics and risk factors for SSIs differ between adults and children. It is therefore essential to conduct high quality RCT investigating interventions to identify optimal measures to reduce SSI rates in children.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
Prospero registration ( CRD42020166193 ).
Topics: Adult; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Child; Chlorhexidine; Humans; Povidone-Iodine; Preoperative Care; Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed: 35902844
DOI: 10.1186/s12887-022-03502-z