Microbial stowaways in topical antiseptic products

Preclosure povidone-iodine lavage in total hip replacement surgery: Infection outcomes and cost-benefit analysis

OBJECTIVE

To report the outcomes and cost-benefit analysis of preclosure povidone-iodine lavage (PrePIL) used to reduce the risk of infection following total hip replacement (THR) surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

ANIMALS

One thousand six hundred ninety-nine dogs, 17 cats.

METHODS

The medical records of 2213 consecutive THR cases were reviewed to determine the incidence of infection. The last 102 were treated with PrePIL using a commercially sourced 0.035% povidone-iodine solution. Postoperative infection rates were compared. A cost-benefit analysis was used to calculate if a PrePIL protocol is economically feasible.

RESULTS

Twenty-one THRs out of 2111 (0.99%) that did not have PrePIL developed infection. Infection occurred in none of the 102 PrePIL cases. Cost analysis revealed a PrePIL break-even cost at $49.74 and a break-even infection rate of 0.949%. No complications were identified related to the use of PrePIL.

CONCLUSION

Preclosure povidone-iodine lavage appeared to be efficacious in lowering THR infection rates, and it appeared to be safe for this use based on our 102 consecutive cases. The cost of the PrePIL was minimal compared to the overall cost to resolve THR infection and the potential effect on hip function prognosis. The math formulas developed can be used by surgeons to calculate cost effectiveness and break-even cost based on their THR infection rate, and to compare to the cost of a THR revision and infection resolution.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

At current costs, PrePIL can be used in 2415 THR cases at a similar cost of a single revision surgery and resolution of a periprosthetic infection.

Antiseptic Irrigation Solutions Used in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Critical Analysis Review

»

There are limited data that directly compare the efficacy of antiseptic irrigation solutions used for the prevention and treatment of periprosthetic joint infections in orthopaedic procedures; there is a notable lack of prospective data.

»

For prevention of periprosthetic joint infections, the strongest evidence supports the use of low-pressure povidone-iodine.

»

For the treatment of periprosthetic joint infections, delivering multiple solutions sequentially may be beneficial.

What Is the Optimal Irrigation Solution in the Management of Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Joint Infections?

BACKGROUND

Thorough irrigation and debridement using an irrigation solution is a well-established treatment for both acute and chronic periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs). In the absence of concrete data, identifying the optimal irrigation agent and protocol remains challenging.

METHODS

A thorough review of the current literature on the various forms of irrigations and their additives was performed to evaluate the efficacy and limitations of each solution as pertaining to pathogen eradication in the treatment of PJI. As there is an overall paucity of high-quality literature comparing irrigation additives to each other and to any control, no meta-analyses could be performed. The literature was therefore summarized in this review article to give readers concise information on current irrigation options and their known risks and benefits.

RESULTS

Antiseptic solutions include povidone-iodine, chlorhexidine gluconate, acetic acid, hydrogen peroxide, sodium hypochlorite, hypochlorous acid, and preformulated commercially available combination solutions. The current literature suggests that intraoperative use of antiseptic irrigants may play a role in treating PJI, but definitive clinical studies comparing antiseptic to no antiseptic irrigation are lacking. Furthermore, no clinical head-to-head comparisons of different antiseptic irrigants have identified an optimal irrigation solution.

CONCLUSION

Further high-quality studies on the optimal irrigation additive and protocol for the management of PJI are warranted to guide future evidence-based decisions.

Is There a Role for Preclosure Dilute Betadine Irrigation in the Prevention of Postoperative Infection Following Total Joint Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND

Conflicting evidence exists surrounding the use of preclosure irrigation solutions in primary total joint arthroplasty (TJA). We aimed to determine the role of dilute betadine lavage in preventing early infection after primary TJA.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed primary TJAs between 2010 and 2018. Dilute betadine lavage was introduced to our practice in November 2014. We included 3513 total hip arthroplasties, 3932 total knee arthroplasties, and 1033 hip resurfacings (HRs). In group 1 (n = 5588), surgical wounds were irrigated with saline; group 2 used dilute betadine solution (n = 2890). Subanalyses using propensity matching based on known risk factors of infection-age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, diabetes, and procedure-were completed.

RESULTS

There were 48 acute infections in group 1 (0.9%) and 23 in group 2 (0.8%) (P = .762). HR without betadine had the highest acute infection prevalence (P = .028). When groups in the whole cohort were propensity score-matched, group 1 had more acute infections than group 2 (P = .033). The effect of betadine was isolated to HR patients. After excluding HR cases, betadine continued to reduce the acute infection rate when compared with the no betadine group, but this was not statistically significant (0.4% vs 0.8%; P = .101). Likewise, we did not find a significant difference in total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty patients (P = .796).

CONCLUSION

There was a decreased infection rate in the betadine group overall when groups were propensity-matched. Because the reduction in the acute infection rate was clinically significant, we feel this practice is an effective means to prevent infections.

Intraoperative povidone-iodine irrigation for infection prevention

Although prevention of infection following arthroplasty requires a multifaceted approach, the use of intraoperative irrigation is an important component of any protocol. Recent clinical practice guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control, World Health Organization, and International Consensus Meeting on Musculoskeletal Infection advocate the use of a dilute povidone-iodine solution prior to wound closure. Our experience suggests that this practice is safe, inexpensive, and easily implemented. The present article describes our institutional irrigation protocol and reviews the current literature regarding povidone-iodine solutions.

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus colonization: a three-year prospective study in a neonatal intensive care unit in Italy

BACKGROUND

Methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a major etiological agent of infection in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). Routes of entry of this organism can be different and the transmission pathway complex. Colonized neonates are the main endogenous reservoir.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted a prospective three-year study on MRSA colonization recruiting 722 neonates admitted between 2009 and 2012. Nasal swabs were cultured weekly and MRSA isolates were submitted to molecular typing. The annual incidence density of acquisition of MRSA ranged from a maximum of 20.2 cases for 1000 patient-days during the first year to a minimum of 8.8 cases in the second one to raise again up to 13.1 cases during the third year. The mean weekly colonization pressure fluctuated from 19.1% in the first year to 13.4% in the second year and 16.8% in the third year. It significantly correlated with the number of MRSA acquisitions in the following week. Overall, 187 (25.9%) subjects tested positive for MRSA. A non multiresistant, tst positive, ST22-MRSA-IVa spa t223 strain proved to be endemic in the NICU, being identified in 166 (88.8%) out of 187 colonized neonates. Sporadic or epidemic occurrence of other strains was detected.

CONCLUSIONS

An MRSA strain belonging to the tst1 positive, UK-EMRSA-15/ "Middle Eastern Variant" appeared to be endemic in the NICU under investigation. During the three-year period, substantial changes occurred in case-mix of patients moving towards a higher susceptibility to MRSA colonization. The infection control procedures were able to decrease the colonization rate from more than 40% to approximately 10%, except for an outbreak due to a CA-MRSA strain, ST1-MRSA-IVa, and a transient increase in the colonization prevalence rate coincident with a period of substantial overcrowding of the ward. Active surveillance and molecular typing contributed to obtain a reliable picture of the MRSA dissemination in NICU.

Controlling hospital MRSA

Recent evidence from publications describing the success of interventions to control hospital meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), often in the endemic setting, is reviewed. Overall, there is cautious ground for optimism that MRSA can be controlled in a cost-effective manner by employing a bundle approach, the mainstay of which is widespread admission screening to inform patient-specific control measures.