Comparison of the effectiveness of preventive systemic administration of antibiotics with topical use of decamethoxin during clean surgical interventions
Keywords:antimicrobial prophylaxis, antiseptics, decamethoxin, cephalosporins, elective surgery
Introduction. The lack of generally accepted standards of perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis leads to the inadequate preventive use of antibiotics associated with development of microbial resistance, changes in the natural biota and sensitization of the patient’s body. Prevention of infectious complications after surgery with topical antiseptic is an appropriate alternative to antibiotic prophylaxis. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of topical antiseptic prophylaxis of infectious complications with a 0.02 % decamethoxin solution compared to systemic antibiotic prophylaxis with cefuroxime (beta-lactam antibiotics) during clean surgeries.
Materials and methods. In the first group of patients (n = 25), the operative field was treated with decametoxin, the abdominal cavity was irrigated through an irrigator during laparoscopic interventions after trocart placement or with a syringe in case of open surgeries (50–150 ml). In the second group (n = 22), cefuroxime was administered at a single dose of 1.5 g 30 to 60 minutes before surgery. Patients underwent inguinal hernia repair (Lichtenstein and laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal repair), thyroidectomy, parathyroidectomy, laparoscopic adrenalectomy, cholecystectomy, cystectomy of the spleen and ovaries for uncomplicated cysts.
Results. Microbiological analysis of the inoculation material taken from the bottom and walls of the surgical wound before suturing (before the wound was treated with an antiseptic agent in the decamethoxin group) revealed no growth of pathological microbiota at clinically significant levels.
Conclusions. The antimicrobial effect of a 0.02 % decamethoxin solution when applied topically during clean surgical interventions is comparable to that of cephalosporin antibiotics. Perioperative antiseptic prophylaxis can reduce the incidence of antibiotic-resistant strains of microorganisms in surgical departments.
Ortega G, Rhee DS, Papandria DJ, Yang J, Ibrahim AM, Shore AD et al. An Evaluation of Surgical Site Infections by Wound Classification System Using the ACS-NSQIP. Journal of Surgical Research [Internet]. Elsevier BV; 2012 May; 174(1):33–8. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2011.05.056 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2011.05.056
Sievert DM, Ricks P, Edwards JR, Schneider A, Patel J, Srinivasan A et al. Antimicrobial-Resistant Pathogens Associated with Healthcare-Associated Infections Summary of Data Reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2009–2010. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology [Internet]. Cambridge University Press (CUP); 2013 Jan; 34(1):1–14. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1086/668770 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/668770
Epidemiologichnij naglyad za infekciyami oblasti hirurgichnogo vtruchannya ta yih profilaktika (Epidemiological surveillance of area infections and their surgery prevention) [Internet]. Available from: http://infectioncontrol.org.ua/wp-content/docs/Nakaz_181_04.04.2008.pdf (In Ukrainian)
Berríos-Torres SI, Umscheid CA, Bratzler DW, Leas B, Stone EC, Kelz RR et al. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Guideline for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infection, 2017. JAMA Surgery [Internet]. American Medical Association (AMA); 2017 Aug 1; 152(8):784. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2017.0904 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2017.0904
Bhattacharya S. Surgical Site Infection by Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus – on Decline? Journal of clinical and diagnostic research [Internet]. JCDR Research and Publications; 2016; Available from: https://doi.org/10.7860/jcdr/2016/21664.8587 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2016/21664.8587
Sakr A, Brégeon F, Mège J-L, Rolain J-M, Blin O. Staphylococcus aureus Nasal Colonization: An Update on Mechanisms, Epidemiology, Risk Factors, and Subsequent Infections. Frontiers in Microbiology [Internet]. Frontiers Media SA; 2018 Oct 8; 9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.02419 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.02419
Leaper DJ, Edmiston CE. World Health Organization: global guidelines for the prevention of surgical site infection. Journal of Hospital Infection [Internet]. Elsevier BV; 2017 Feb; 95(2):135–6. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2016.12.016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2016.12.016
El-Kabbani A, A. Tolba Y, Al-Kayyali N. An observational study of perioperative antibiotic-prophylaxis use at a major quaternary care and referral hospital in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia [Internet]. Medknow; 2018; 12(1):82. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.sja_187_17 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.SJA_187_17
Ayisi LA, Adu-Sarkodie Y. Extended-spectrum-beta-lactamase (ESBL) production among Escherichia coli and Klebsiella species in Kumasi, Ghana. J. Nat. Sci. Res., 2015.
Nazarchuk OA. Microbiological and molecular research of the resistance in gram-negative pathogens of infectious complications to carbapenem antibiotics, approaches to its combating. Moldovan Journal of Health Sciences. 2017; 13 (3): 22–32
Nazarchuk O. Research of antimicrobial efficacy of modern antiseptic agents based on decamethoxine and povidone-iodine. Perioperaciina Medicina [Internet]. Interdisciplinar Academy of Pain Medicine; 2019 Jun 27; 2(1):6–10. Available from: https://doi.org/10.31636/prmd.v2i1.1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31636/prmd.v2i1.1
Kramer A, Dissemond J, Kim S, Willy C, Mayer D, Papke R et al. Consensus on Wound Antisepsis: Update 2018. Skin Pharmacology and Physiology [Internet]. S. Karger AG; 2017 Dec 21; 31(1):28–58. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1159/000481545 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000481545
Campbell N, Campbell D. Evaluation of a non-adherent, povidone-iodine dressing in a case series of chronic wounds. Journal of Wound Care [Internet]. Mark Allen Group; 2013 Aug; 22(8):401–6. Available from: https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2013.22.8.401 DOI: https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2013.22.8.401
Velazquez-Meza ME, Hernández-Salgado M, Sánchez-Alemán MA. Evaluation of the Antimicrobial Activity of a Super Oxidized Solution in Clinical Isolates. Microbial Drug Resistance [Internet]. Mary Ann Liebert Inc; 2015 Aug; 21(4):367–72. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1089/mdr.2014.0266 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/mdr.2014.0266
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. FDA warns about reactions with antiseptic chlorhexidine gluconate [Internet]. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA; Available from: https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/fda-drug-safety-communication-fda-warns-about-rare-serious-allergic-reactions-skin-antiseptic
Dissemond J, Böttrich JG, Braunwarth H, Hilt J, Wilken P, Münter K-C. Evidenz von Silber in der Wundbehandlung - Metaanalyse der klinischen Studien von 2000–2015. JDDG: Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft [Internet]. Wiley; 2017 May; 15(5):524–36. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/ddg.13233_g DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ddg.13233_g
Kurtz S. Projections of Primary and Revision Hip and Knee Arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American) [Internet]. Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health); 2007 Apr 1; 89(4):780. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.f.00222 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.00222
Recommendations: Surgical site infections: prevention and treatment: Guidance [Internet]. NICE. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng125/chapter/Recommendations
How to Cite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License