Reducing Hospitalizations and Multidrug-Resistant Organisms via Regional Decolonization in Hospitals and Nursing Homes.

Importance: Infections due to multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) are associated with increased morbidity, mortality, length of hospitalization, and health care costs. Regional interventions may be advantageous in mitigating MDROs and associated infections. Objective: To evaluate whether implementation of a decolonization collaborative is associated with reduced regional MDRO prevalence, incident clinical cultures, infection-related hospitalizations, costs, and deaths. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study was conducted from July 1, 2017, to July 31, 2019, across 35 health care facilities in Orange County, California. Exposures: Chlorhexidine bathing and nasal iodophor antisepsis for residents in long-term care and hospitalized patients in contact precautions (CP). Main Outcomes and Measures: Baseline and end of intervention MDRO point prevalence among participating facilities; incident MDRO (nonscreening) clinical cultures among participating and nonparticipating facilities; and infection-related hospitalizations and associated costs and deaths among residents in participating and nonparticipating nursing homes (NHs). Results: Thirty-five facilities (16 hospitals, 16 NHs, 3 long-term acute care hospitals [LTACHs]) adopted the intervention. Comparing decolonization with baseline periods among participating facilities, the mean (SD) MDRO prevalence decreased from 63.9% (12.2%) to 49.9% (11.3%) among NHs, from 80.0% (7.2%) to 53.3% (13.3%) among LTACHs (odds ratio [OR] for NHs and LTACHs, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.40-0.57), and from 64.1% (8.5%) to 55.4% (13.8%) (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.60-0.93) among hospitalized patients in CP. When comparing decolonization with baseline among NHs, the mean (SD) monthly incident MDRO clinical cultures changed from 2.7 (1.9) to 1.7 (1.1) among participating NHs, from 1.7 (1.4) to 1.5 (1.1) among nonparticipating NHs (group × period interaction reduction, 30.4%; 95% CI, 16.4%-42.1%), from 25.5 (18.6) to 25.0 (15.9) among participating hospitals, from 12.5 (10.1) to 14.3 (10.2) among nonparticipating hospitals (group × period interaction reduction, 12.9%; 95% CI, 3.3%-21.5%), and from 14.8 (8.6) to 8.2 (6.1) among LTACHs (all facilities participating; 22.5% reduction; 95% CI, 4.4%-37.1%). For NHs, the rate of infection-related hospitalizations per 1000 resident-days changed from 2.31 during baseline to 1.94 during intervention among participating NHs, and from 1.90 to 2.03 among nonparticipating NHs (group × period interaction reduction, 26.7%; 95% CI, 19.0%-34.5%). Associated hospitalization costs per 1000 resident-days changed from $64 651 to $55 149 among participating NHs and from $55 151 to $59 327 among nonparticipating NHs (group × period interaction reduction, 26.8%; 95% CI, 26.7%-26.9%). Associated hospitalization deaths per 1000 resident-days changed from 0.29 to 0.25 among participating NHs and from 0.23 to 0.24 among nonparticipating NHs (group × period interaction reduction, 23.7%; 95% CI, 4.5%-43.0%). Conclusions and Relevance: A regional collaborative involving universal decolonization in long-term care facilities and targeted decolonization among hospital patients in CP was associated with lower MDRO carriage, infections, hospitalizations, costs, and deaths.

Nasal Iodophor Antiseptic vs Nasal Mupirocin Antibiotic in the Setting of Chlorhexidine Bathing to Prevent Infections in Adult ICUs: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Universal nasal mupirocin plus chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) bathing in intensive care units (ICUs) prevents methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections and all-cause bloodstream infections. Antibiotic resistance to mupirocin has raised questions about whether an antiseptic could be advantageous for ICU decolonization. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of iodophor vs mupirocin for universal ICU nasal decolonization in combination with CHG bathing. Design, Setting, and Participants: Two-group noninferiority, pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial conducted in US community hospitals, all of which used mupirocin-CHG for universal decolonization in ICUs at baseline. Adult ICU patients in 137 randomized hospitals during baseline (May 1, 2015-April 30, 2017) and intervention (November 1, 2017-April 30, 2019) were included. Intervention: Universal decolonization involving switching to iodophor-CHG (intervention) or continuing mupirocin-CHG (baseline). Main Outcomes and Measures: ICU-attributable S aureus clinical cultures (primary outcome), MRSA clinical cultures, and all-cause bloodstream infections were evaluated using proportional hazard models to assess differences from baseline to intervention periods between the strategies. Results were also compared with a 2009-2011 trial of mupirocin-CHG vs no decolonization in the same hospital network. The prespecified noninferiority margin for the primary outcome was 10%. Results: Among the 801 668 admissions in 233 ICUs, the participants' mean (SD) age was 63.4 (17.2) years, 46.3% were female, and the mean (SD) ICU length of stay was 4.8 (4.7) days. Hazard ratios (HRs) for S aureus clinical isolates in the intervention vs baseline periods were 1.17 for iodophor-CHG (raw rate: 5.0 vs 4.3/1000 ICU-attributable days) and 0.99 for mupirocin-CHG (raw rate: 4.1 vs 4.0/1000 ICU-attributable days) (HR difference in differences significantly lower by 18.4% [95% CI, 10.7%-26.6%] for mupirocin-CHG, P < .001). For MRSA clinical cultures, HRs were 1.13 for iodophor-CHG (raw rate: 2.3 vs 2.1/1000 ICU-attributable days) and 0.99 for mupirocin-CHG (raw rate: 2.0 vs 2.0/1000 ICU-attributable days) (HR difference in differences significantly lower by 14.1% [95% CI, 3.7%-25.5%] for mupirocin-CHG, P = .007). For all-pathogen bloodstream infections, HRs were 1.00 (2.7 vs 2.7/1000) for iodophor-CHG and 1.01 (2.6 vs 2.6/1000) for mupirocin-CHG (nonsignificant HR difference in differences, -0.9% [95% CI, -9.0% to 8.0%]; P = .84). Compared with the 2009-2011 trial, the 30-day relative reduction in hazards in the mupirocin-CHG group relative to no decolonization (2009-2011 trial) were as follows: S aureus clinical cultures (current trial: 48.1% [95% CI, 35.6%-60.1%]; 2009-2011 trial: 58.8% [95% CI, 47.5%-70.7%]) and bloodstream infection rates (current trial: 70.4% [95% CI, 62.9%-77.8%]; 2009-2011 trial: 60.1% [95% CI, 49.1%-70.7%]). Conclusions and Relevance: Nasal iodophor antiseptic did not meet criteria to be considered noninferior to nasal mupirocin antibiotic for the outcome of S aureus clinical cultures in adult ICU patients in the context of daily CHG bathing. In addition, the results were consistent with nasal iodophor being inferior to nasal mupirocin. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03140423.

Efficacy of topical cadexomer iodine treatment in chronic wounds: Systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative clinical trials.

The aim of this study was to summarise the clinical evidence supporting almost 40 years of topical cadexomer iodine (CIOD) use in wound bed preparation by removing barriers to healing such as exudate, slough, bioburden, and infection and allowing chronic wound progression. A systematic review was conducted (Embase/PubMed, November 2020) to identify relevant comparative studies meeting inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses were performed using a fixed-effects (I2 < 50%) or random-effects model (I2 ≥ 50%) depending on statistical heterogeneity. Dichotomous outcomes were reported as relative risk (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD), with 95% confidence intervals. In total, 436 publications were identified of which 13 were comparative trials including outcomes of interest. Significant reductions in exudate, pus/debris, slough, bioburden, and infection were reported in chronic wounds treated with CIOD, compared with standard of care (SOC). Meta-analyses highlighted the positive impact of CIOD on mean wound area reduction (MD = 2.35 cm2 , 95% CI = 0.34-4.36, P = .0219) after eight weeks treatment and overall wound healing events compared to SOC; wounds including venous leg ulcers, diabetic foot ulcers, and pressure ulcers treated with CIOD were more than twice as likely to heal than those receiving SOC (RR = 2.30, 95% CI = 1.54-3.45, P < .0001). This meta-analysis demonstrates the efficacy of CIOD on chronic wounds through removal of barriers to healing. CIOD should be considered in wound bed preparation and treatment protocols.

Skin preparation for preventing infection following caesarean section.

BACKGROUND: The risk of maternal mortality and morbidity is higher after caesarean section than for vaginal birth. With increasing rates of caesarean section, it is important to minimise risks to the mother as much as possible. This review focused on different skin preparations to prevent infection. This is an update of a review last published in 2018. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of different antiseptic agents, different methods of application, or different forms of antiseptic used for preoperative skin preparation for preventing postcaesarean infection. SEARCH METHODS: For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (9 July 2019), and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials, evaluating any type of preoperative skin preparation (agents, methods or forms). We included studies presented only as abstracts, if there was enough information to assess risk of bias. Comparisons of interest in this review were between: different antiseptic agents (e.g. alcohol, povidone iodine), different methods of antiseptic application (e.g. scrub, paint, drape), different forms of antiseptic (e.g. powder, liquid), and also between different packages of skin preparation including a mix of agents and methods, such as a plastic incisional drape, which may or may not be impregnated with antiseptic agents. We mainly focused on the comparison between different agents, with and without the use of drapes. Only studies involving the preparation of the incision area were included. This review did not cover studies of preoperative handwashing by the surgical team or preoperative bathing. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently assessed all potential studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias, extracted the data and checked data for accuracy. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 individually-randomised controlled trials (RCTs), with a total of 6938 women who were undergoing caesarean section. Twelve trials (6916 women) contributed data to this review. The trial dates ranged from 1983 to 2016. Six trials were conducted in the USA, and the remainder in India, Egypt, Nigeria, South Africa, France, Denmark, and Indonesia. The included studies were broadly at low risk of bias for most domains, although high risk of detection bias raised some specific concerns in a number of studies. Length of stay was only reported in one comparison. Antiseptic agents Parachlorometaxylenol with iodine versus iodine alone We are uncertain whether parachlorometaxylenol with iodine made any difference to the incidence of surgical site infection (risk ratio (RR) 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04 to 2.99; 1 trial, 50 women), or endometritis (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.38; 1 trial, 50 women) when compared with iodine alone, because the certainty of the evidence was very low. Adverse events (maternal or neonatal) were not reported. Chlorhexidine gluconate versus povidone iodine Moderate-certainty evidence suggested that chlorhexidine gluconate, when compared with povidone iodine, probably slightly reduces the incidence of surgical site infection (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.91; 8 trials, 4323 women). This effect was still present in a sensitivity analysis after removing four trials at high risk of bias for outcome assessment (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.23; 4 trials, 2037 women). Low-certainty evidence indicated that chlorhexidine gluconate, when compared with povidone iodine, may make little or no difference to the incidence of endometritis (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.86; 3 trials, 2484 women). It is uncertain whether chlorhexidine gluconate reduces maternal skin irritation or allergic skin reaction (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.46; 3 trials, 1926 women; very low certainty evidence). One small study (60 women) reported reduced bacterial growth at 18 hours after caesarean section for women who had chlorhexidine gluconate preparation compared with women who had povidone iodine preparation (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.70). Methods Drape versus no drape This comparison investigated the use of drape versus no drape, following preparation of the skin with antiseptics. Low-certainty evidence suggested that using a drape before surgery compared with no drape, may make little or no difference to the incidence of surgical site infection (RR 1.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.71; 3 trials, 1373 women), and probably makes little or no difference to the length of stay in the hospital (mean difference (MD) 0.10 days, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.46; 1 trial, 603 women; moderate-certainty evidence). One trial compared an alcohol scrub and iodophor drape with a five-minute iodophor scrub only, and reported no surgical site infection in either group (79 women, very-low certainty evidence). We were uncertain whether the combination of a one-minute alcohol scrub and a drape reduced the incidence of metritis when compared with a five-minute scrub, because the certainty of the evidence was very low (RR 1.62, 95% CI 0.29 to 9.16; 1 trial, 79 women). The studies did not report on adverse events (maternal or neonatal). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Moderate-certainty evidence suggests that preparing the skin with chlorhexidine gluconate before caesarean section is probably slightly more effective at reducing the incidence of surgical site infection in comparison to povidone iodine. For other outcomes examined there was insufficient evidence available from the included RCTs. Most of the evidence in this review was deemed to be very low or low certainty. This means that for most findings, our confidence in any evidence of an intervention effect is limited, and indicates the need for more high-quality research. Therefore, it is not yet clear what sort of skin preparation may be most effective for preventing postcaesarean surgical site infection, or for reducing other undesirable outcomes for mother and baby. Well-designed RCTs, with larger sample sizes are needed. High-priority questions include comparing types of antiseptic (especially iodine versus chlorhexidine), and application methods (scrubbing, swabbing, or draping). We found two studies that are ongoing; we will incorporate the results of these studies in future updates of this review.

MmpL3 Inhibition: A New Approach to Treat Nontuberculous Mycobacterial Infections.

Outside of Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Mycobacterium leprae, nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) are environmental mycobacteria (>190 species) and are classified as slow- or rapid-growing mycobacteria. Infections caused by NTM show an increased incidence in immunocompromised patients and patients with underlying structural lung disease. The true global prevalence of NTM infections remains unknown because many countries do not require mandatory reporting of the infection. This is coupled with a challenging diagnosis and identification of the species. Current therapies for treatment of NTM infections require multidrug regimens for a minimum of 18 months and are associated with serious adverse reactions, infection relapse, and high reinfection rates, necessitating discovery of novel antimycobacterial agents. Robust drug discovery processes have discovered inhibitors targeting mycobacterial membrane protein large 3 (MmpL3), a protein responsible for translocating mycolic acids from the inner membrane to periplasm in the biosynthesis of the mycobacterial cell membrane. This review focuses on promising new chemical scaffolds that inhibit MmpL3 function and represent interesting and promising putative drug candidates for the treatment of NTM infections. Additionally, agents (FS-1, SMARt-420, C10) that promote reversion of drug resistance are also reviewed.

Cadexomer iodine effectively reduces bacterial biofilm in porcine wounds ex vivo and in vivo.

Biofilms are prevalent in non-healing chronic wounds and implicated in delayed healing. Tolerance to antimicrobial treatments and the host's immune system leave clinicians with limited interventions against biofilm populations. It is therefore essential that effective treatments be rigorously tested and demonstrate an impact on biofilm across multiple experimental models to guide clinical investigations and protocols. Cadexomer iodine has previously been shown to be effective against biofilm in various in vitro models, against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus biofilm in mouse wounds, and clinically in diabetic foot ulcers complicated by biofilm. Similarities between porcine and human skin make the pig a favoured model for cutaneous wound studies. Two antiseptic dressings and a gauze control were assessed against mature biofilm grown on ex vivo pig skin and in a pig wound model. Significant reductions in biofilm were observed following treatment with cadexomer iodine across both biofilm models. In contrast, silver carboxymethylcellulose dressings had minimal impact on biofilm in the models, with similar results to the control in the ex vivo model. Microscopy and histopathology indicate that the depth of organisms in wound tissue may impact treatment effectiveness. Further work on the promising biofilm efficacy of cadexomer iodine is needed to determine optimal treatment durations against biofilm.

Skin preparation for preventing infection following caesarean section.

BACKGROUND: The risk of maternal mortality and morbidity (particularly postoperative infection) is higher for caesarean section (CS) than for vaginal birth. With the increasing rate of CS, it is important to minimise the risks to the mother as much as possible. This review focused on different forms and methods of preoperative skin preparation to prevent infection. This review is an update of a review that was first published in 2012, and updated in 2014. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of different antiseptic agents, different methods of application, or different forms of antiseptic used for preoperative skin preparation for preventing postcaesarean infection. SEARCH METHODS: For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (27 November 2017), and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials, evaluating any type of preoperative skin preparation agents, forms, and methods of application for caesarean section.Comparisons of interest in this review were between different antiseptic agents used for CS skin preparation (e.g. alcohol, povidone iodine), different methods of antiseptic application (e.g. scrub, paint, drape), different forms of antiseptic (e.g. powder, liquid), and also between different skin preparations, such as a plastic incisional drape, which may or may not be impregnated with antiseptic agents.Only studies involving the preparation of the incision area were included. This review did not cover studies of preoperative handwashing by the surgical team or preoperative bathing. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently assessed all potential studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias, and extracted the data using a predesigned form. We checked data for accuracy. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: For this update, we included 11 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), with a total of 6237 women who were undergoing CS. Ten trials (6215 women) contributed data to this review. All included studies were individual RCTs. We did not identify any quasi- or cluster-RCTs. The trial dates ranged from 1983 to 2016. Six trials were conducted in the USA, and the remainder in Nigeria, South Africa, France, Denmark, and Indonesia.The included studies were broadly methodologically sound, but raised some specific concerns regarding risk of bias in a number of cases.Drape versus no drapeThis comparison investigated the use of a non-impregnated drape versus no drape, following preparation of the skin with antiseptics. For women undergoing CS, low-quality evidence suggested that using a drape before surgery compared with no drape, may make little or no difference to the incidence of surgical site infection (risk ratio (RR) 1.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.71; 2 trials, 1294 women), or length of stay in the hospital (mean difference (MD) 0.10 day, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.46 1 trial, 603 women).One-minute alcohol scrub with iodophor drape versus five-minute iodophor scrub without drapeOne trial compared an alcohol scrub and iodophor drape with a five-minute iodophor scrub only, and reported no surgical site infection in either group (79 women, very-low quality evidence). We were uncertain whether the combination of a one-minute alcohol scrub and a drape reduced the incidence of endomyometritis when compared with a five-minute scrub, because the quality of the evidence was very low (RR 1.62, 95% CI 0.29 to 9.16; 1 trial, 79 women).Parachlorometaxylenol with iodine versus iodine aloneWe were uncertain whether parachlorometaxylenol with iodine before CS made any difference to the incidence of surgical site infection (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.99; 1 trial, 50 women), or endometritis (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.38; 1 trial, 50 women) when compared with iodine alone, because the quality of the evidence was very low.Chlorhexidine gluconate versus povidone iodineLow-quality evidence suggested that chlorhexidine gluconate before CS, when compared with povidone iodine, may make little or no difference to the incidence of surgical site infection (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.02; 6 trials, 3607 women). However, surgical site infection appeared to be slightly reduced for women for whom chlorhexidine gluconate was used compared with povidone iodine after we removed four trials at high risk of bias for outcome assessment, in a sensitivity analysis (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.95; 2 trials, 1321 women).Low-quality evidence indicated that chlorhexidine gluconate before CS, when compared with povidone iodine, may make little or no difference to the incidence of endometritis (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.51 to 2.01; 2 trials, 2079 women), or to reducing maternal skin irritation or allergic skin reaction (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.63; 2 trials, 1521 women).One small study (60 women) reported reduced bacterial growth at 18 hours after CS for women who had chlorhexidine gluconate preparation compared with women who had povidone iodine preparation (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.70).None of the included trials reported on maternal mortality or repeat surgery.Chlorhexidine 0.5% versus 70% alcohol plus drapeOne trial, which was only available as an abstract, investigated the effect of skin preparation on neonatal adverse events, and found cord blood iodine concentration to be higher in the iodine group. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was insufficient evidence available from the included RCTs to fully evaluate different agents and methods of skin preparation for preventing infection following caesarean section. Therefore, it is not yet clear what sort of skin preparation may be most effective for preventing postcaesarean surgical site infection, or for reducing other undesirable outcomes for mother and baby.Most of the evidence in this review was deemed to be very low or low quality. This means that for most findings, our confidence in any evidence of an intervention effect is limited, and indicates the need for more high-quality research.This field needs high quality, well designed RCTs, with larger sample sizes. High priority questions include comparing types of antiseptic (especially iodine versus chlorhexidine), and application methods (scrubbing, swabbing, or draping). We found four studies that were ongoing; we will incorporate the results of these studies in future updates of this review.

Effect of cadexomer iodine on the microbial load and diversity of chronic non-healing diabetic foot ulcers complicated by biofilm in vivo.

Objectives: The performance of cadexomer iodine was determined against microbial populations from chronic non-healing diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) complicated by biofilm in vivo , using molecular, microscopy and zymography methods. Methods: Chronic non-healing DFUs due to suspected biofilm involvement were eligible for enrolment. DNA sequencing and real-time quantitative PCR was used to determine the microbial load and diversity of tissue punch biopsies obtained pre- and post-treatment. Scanning electron microscopy and/or fluorescence in situ hybridization confirmed the presence or absence of biofilm. Zymography was used to determine levels of wound proteases. Results: Seventeen participants were recruited over a 6 month period. Scanning electron microscopy and or fluorescence in situ hybridization confirmed the presence of biofilm in all samples. Eleven participants exhibited log 10 reductions in microbial load after treatment (range 1-2 log 10 ) in comparison with six patients who experienced <1 log 10 reduction ( P = 0.04). Samples were tested for levels of wound proteases pre- and post-treatment. Reductions in the microbial load correlated to reductions in wound proteases pre- and post-treatment ( P = 0.03). Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this study represents the first in vivo evidence, employing a range of molecular and microscopy techniques, of the ability of cadexomer iodine to reduce the microbial load of chronic non-healing DFUs complicated by biofilm. Further analyses correlating log reductions to optimal duration of therapy and improvements in clinical parameters of wound healing in a larger cohort are required.

Hyperosmotic Agents and Antibiotics Affect Dissolved Oxygen and pH Concentration Gradients in Staphylococcus aureus Biofilms.

Biofilms on wound surfaces are treated topically with hyperosmotic agents, such as medical-grade honey and cadexomer iodine; in some cases, these treatments are combined with antibiotics. Tissue repair requires oxygen, and a low pH is conducive to oxygen release from red blood cells and epithelialization. We investigated the variation of dissolved oxygen concentration and pH with biofilm depth and the variation in oxygen consumption rates when biofilms are challenged with medical-grade honey or cadexomer iodine combined with vancomycin or ciprofloxacin. Dissolved oxygen and pH depth profiles in Staphylococcus aureus biofilms were measured using microelectrodes. The presence of cadexomer iodine with vancomycin or ciprofloxacin on the surface of the biofilm permitted a measurable concentration of oxygen at greater biofilm depths (101.6 ± 27.3 µm, P = 0.02; and 155.5 ± 27.9 µm, P = 0.016, respectively) than in untreated controls (30.1 µm). Decreases in pH of ∼0.6 and ∼0.4 units were observed in biofilms challenged with medical-grade honey alone and combined with ciprofloxacin, respectively (P < 0.001 and 0.01, respectively); the number of bacteria recovered from biofilms was significantly reduced (1.26 log) by treatment with cadexomer iodine and ciprofloxacin (P = 0.002) compared to the untreated control. Combining cadexomer iodine and ciprofloxacin improved dissolved oxygen concentration and penetration depth into the biofilm, while medical-grade honey was associated with a lower pH; not all treatments established a bactericidal effect in the time frame used in the experiments.IMPORTANCE Reports about using hyperosmotic agents and antibiotics against wound biofilms focus mostly on killing bacteria, but the results of these treatments should additionally be considered in the context of how they affect physiologically important parameters, such as oxygen concentration and pH. We confirmed that the combination of a hyperosmotic agent and an antibiotic results in greater dissolved oxygen and reduced pH within an S. aureus biofilm.

Antibiotics and antiseptics for pressure ulcers.

BACKGROUND: Pressure ulcers, also known as bedsores, decubitus ulcers and pressure injuries, are localised areas of injury to the skin or the underlying tissue, or both. A range of treatments with antimicrobial properties, including impregnated dressings, are widely used in the treatment of pressure ulcers. A clear and current overview is required to facilitate decision making regarding use of antiseptic or antibiotic therapies in the treatment of pressure ulcers. This review is one of a suite of Cochrane reviews investigating the use of antiseptics and antibiotics in different types of wounds. It also forms part of a suite of reviews investigating the use of different types of dressings and topical treatments in the treatment of pressure ulcers. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of systemic and topical antibiotics, and topical antiseptics on the healing of infected and uninfected pressure ulcers being treated in any clinical setting. SEARCH METHODS: In October 2015 we searched: the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations), Ovid EMBASE, and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched three clinical trials registries and the references of included studies and relevant systematic reviews. There were no restrictions based on language or date of publication or study setting. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials which enrolled adults with pressure ulcers of stage II or above were included in the review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction. MAIN RESULTS: We included 12 trials (576 participants); 11 had two arms and one had three arms. All assessed topical agents, none looked at systemic antibiotics. The included trials assessed the following antimicrobial agents: povidone iodine, cadexomer iodine, gentian violet, lysozyme, silver dressings, honey, pine resin, polyhexanide, silver sulfadiazine, and nitrofurazone with ethoxy-diaminoacridine. Comparators included a range of other dressings and ointments without antimicrobial properties and alternative antimicrobials. Each comparison had only one trial, participant numbers were low and follow-up times short. The evidence varied from moderate to very low quality.Six trials reported the primary outcome of wound healing. All except one compared an antiseptic with a non-antimicrobial comparator. There was some moderate and low quality evidence that fewer ulcers may heal in the short term when treated with povidone iodine compared with non-antimicrobial alternatives (protease-modulating dressings (risk ratio (RR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 0.98) and hydrogel (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.97)); and no clear difference between povidone iodine and a third non-antimicrobial treatment (hydrocolloid) (low quality evidence). Pine resin salve may heal more pressure ulcers than hydrocolloid (RR 2.83, 95% CI 1.14 to 7.05) (low quality evidence). There is no clear difference between cadexomer iodine and standard care, and between honey a combined antiseptic and antibiotic treatment (very low quality evidence).Six trials reported adverse events (primary safety outcome). Four reported no adverse events; there was very low quality evidence from one showing no clear evidence of a difference between cadexomer iodine and standard care; in one trial it was not clear whether data were appropriately reported.There was limited reporting of secondary outcomes. The five trials that reported change in wound size as a continuous outcome did not report any clear evidence favouring any particular antiseptic/anti-microbial treatments. For bacterial resistance, one trial found some evidence of more MRSA eradication in participants with ulcer treated with a polyhexanide dressing compared with a polyhexanide swab (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.13); patients in the dressing group also reported less pain (MD -2.03, 95% CI -2.66 to -1.40). There was no clear evidence of a difference between interventions in infection resolution in three other comparisons. Evidence for secondary outcomes varied from moderate to very low quality; where no GRADE assessment was possible we identified substantial limitations which an assessment would have taken into account. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The relative effects of systemic and topical antimicrobial treatments on pressure ulcers are not clear. Where differences in wound healing were found, these sometimes favoured the comparator treatment without antimicrobial properties. The trials are small, clinically heterogenous, generally of short duration, and at high or unclear risk of bias. The quality of the evidence ranges from moderate to very low; evidence on all comparisons was subject to some limitations.

Role of antiseptics in the prevention of surgical site infections.

BACKGROUND: Antiseptics are chemical agents used to reduce the microbial population on the surface of the skin and are used in nearly every surgical procedure today. Despite this, there are currently no definitive guidelines on surgical preoperative antisepsis that indicate a specific regimen based on demonstration of superior efficacy. OBJECTIVE: This review serves to examine preoperative antisepsis, including cutaneous bacteriology, preoperative hair removal, preoperative decolonization, surgical attire, and the antiseptic agents themselves. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A review of the literature on surgical antiseptics was performed. RESULTS: Although numerous studies have demonstrated differences in bacterial colonization rates, few well-controlled investigations have demonstrated superiority of a given regimen. The alcohol-based iodophor and chlorhexidine products seem to exhibit greater efficacy than their aqueous counterparts. CONCLUSION: More randomized controlled trials will be needed to determine if any specific regimen is most effective. At this point in time, product usage should be based on specific attributes relating to the products, such as iodophors around the eyes and/or ears to avoid irritation and aqueous-based solutions in hair bearing areas because of concern for flammability. Ultimately, it is up to the individual surgeon to tailor the optimal antiseptic regimen for their specific scope of practice.

Skin preparation for preventing infection following caesarean section.

BACKGROUND: The risk of maternal mortality and morbidity (particularly postoperative infection) is higher for caesarean section than for vaginal birth. With the increasing rate of caesarean section, it is important that the risks to the mother are minimised as far as possible. This review focuses on different forms and methods for preoperative skin preparation to prevent infection. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of different agent forms and methods of preoperative skin preparation for preventing postcaesarean infection. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (26 June 2014) and the reference lists of all included studies and review articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials, including cluster-randomised trials, evaluating any type of preoperative skin preparation agents, forms and methods of application for caesarean section. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently assessed all potential studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted the data using a predesigned form. Data were checked for accuracy. MAIN RESULTS: We included six trials with a total of 1522 women. No difference was found in the primary outcomes of either wound infection or endometritis. Two trials of 1294 women, compared drape with no drape (one trial using iodine and the other using chlorhexidine) and found no significant difference in wound infection (risk ratio (RR) 1.29; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.71). One trial of 79 women comparing alcohol scrub and iodophor drape with iodophor scrub without drape reported no wound infection in either group. One trial of 50 women comparing parachlorometaxylenol plus iodine with iodine alone reported no significant difference in wound infection (RR 0.33; 95% CI 0.04 to 2.99).Two trials reported endometritis, one trial comparing alcohol scrub and iodophor drape with iodophor scrub only found no significant difference (RR 1.62; 95% CI 0.29 to 9.16). The other trial of 50 women comparing parachlorometaxylenol plus iodine with iodine alone reported no significant difference in endometritis (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.56 to 1.38). One trial of 60 women comparing chlorhexidine gluconate with povidone-iodine reported significant lower rates of bacterial growth at 18 hours after caesarean section (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.70). No difference was found in the secondary outcome of either length of stay or reduction of skin bacteria colony count. No trial reported other maternal outcomes, i.e. maternal mortality, repeat surgery and re-admission resulting from infection. One trial, which was only available as an abstract, investigated the effect of skin preparation on neonatal adverse events and found cord blood iodine concentration to be significantly higher in the iodine group.Most of the risk of bias in the included studies was unclear in selection bias and attrition bias. The quality of the evidence using GRADE was low for wound infection comparing drape versus no drape, one-minute alcohol scrub with iodophor drape versus five-minute iodophor scrub without drape, and parachlorometaxylenol with iodine versus iodine alone. The quality of the evidence for wound infection comparing chlorhexidine gluconate with povidone-iodine was very low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review found that chlorhexidine gluconate compared with iodine alone was associated with lower rates of bacterial growth at 18 hours after caesarean section. However, this outcome was judged as very low quality of evidence. Little evidence is available from the included randomised controlled trials to evaluate different agent forms, concentrations and methods of skin preparation for preventing infection following caesarean section. Therefore, it is not yet clear what sort of skin preparation may be most efficient for preventing postcaesarean wound and surgical site infection.There is a need for high-quality, properly designed randomised controlled trials with larger sample sizes in this field. High priority questions include comparing types of antiseptic (especially iodine versus chlorhexidine), the timing and duration of applying the antiseptic (especially previous night versus day of surgery, and application methods (scrubbing, swabbing and draping).

Skin preparation for preventing infection following caesarean section.

BACKGROUND: The risk of maternal mortality and morbidity (particularly postoperative infection) is higher for caesarean section than for vaginal birth. With the increase in caesarean section, it is important that the risks to the mother are minimised as far as possible. This review focuses on different forms and methods for preoperative skin preparation to prevent infection. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of different agent forms and methods of preoperative skin preparation for preventing postcaesarean infection. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (2 January 2012) and the reference lists of all included studies and review articles SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials, including cluster-randomised trials, evaluating any type of preoperative skin preparation agents, forms and methods of application for caesarean section. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently assessed all potential studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted the data using a predesigned form. Data were checked for accuracy. MAIN RESULTS: We included five trials with a total of 1462 women. No difference was found in the primary outcomes of either wound infection or endometritis. Two trials of 1294 women, compared drape with no drape (one trial using iodine and the other using chlorhexidine) and found no significant difference in wound infection (risk ratio (RR) 1.29; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.71). One trial of 79 women comparing alcohol scrub and iodophor drape with iodophor scrub without drape reported no wound infection in either group. One trial of 50 women comparing parachlorometaxylenol plus iodine with iodine alone reported no significant difference in wound infection (RR 0.33; 95% CI 0.04 to 2.99).Two trials reported endometritis, one trial comparing alcohol scrub and iodophor drape with iodophor scrub only found no significant difference (RR 1.62; 95% CI 0.29 to 9.16). The other trial of 50 women comparing parachlorometaxylenol plus iodine with iodine alone reported no significant difference in endometritis (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.56 to 1.38). No difference was found in the secondary outcome of either length of stay or reduction of skin bacteria colony count. No trial reported other maternal outcomes, i.e. maternal mortality, repeat surgery and re-admission resulting from infection. One trial, which was only available as an abstract, investigated the effect of skin preparation on neonatal adverse events and found cord blood iodine concentration to be significantly higher in the iodine group. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Little evidence is available from the included randomised controlled trials to evaluate different agent forms, concentrations and methods of skin preparation for preventing infection following caesarean section. Therefore, it is not yet clear what sort of skin preparation may be most efficient for preventing postcaesarean wound and surgical site infection. There is a need for high-quality, properly designed randomised controlled trials with larger sample sizes in this field. High priority questions include comparing types of antiseptic (especially iodine versus chlorhexidine), the timing and duration of applying the antiseptic (especially previous night versus day of surgery, and application methods (scrubbing, swabbing and draping).

Ameliorative effect of a microbial feed additive on infectious bronchitis virus antibody titer and stress index in broiler chicks fed deoxynivalenol.

Although acute mycotoxicoses are rare in poultry production, chronic exposure to low levels of mycotoxins is responsible for reduced productivity and increased susceptibility to infectious diseases. Deoxynivalenol (DON) is known to modulate immune function, but only a few studies have investigated the effect of DON on the vaccinal immune response. In addition, the effects of Mycofix select (Biomin GmbH, Herzogenburg, Austria) supplementation to DON-contaminated broiler diets have not yet been demonstrated. Therefore, an experiment with 1-d-old male broilers (Ross 308) was carried out to examine the effects of feeding DON-contaminated low-protein grower diets on performance, serum biochemical parameters, lymphoid organ weight, and antibody titers to infectious bronchitis vaccination in serum and to evaluate the effects of Mycofix select dietary supplementation in either the presence or absence of DON in broilers. In total, thirty-two 1-d-old broiler chicks were randomly assigned to 1 of the 4 dietary treatments for 5 wk. The dietary treatments were 1) control; 2) artificially contaminated diets with 10 mg of DON/kg of diet; 3) DON-contaminated diets supplemented with Mycofix select; and 4) control diet supplemented with Mycofix select. Feeding of contaminated diets decreased (P = 0.000) the feed intake, BW (P = 0.001), BW gain (P = 0.044), and feed efficiency during the grower phase. Deoxynivalenol affected the blood biochemistry, whereas plasma total protein and uric acid concentrations in birds fed contaminated grains were decreased compared with those of the controls. Moreover, in birds fed contaminated feeds, there was a tendency to reduce triglycerides in the plasma (P = 0.090), suggesting that DON in the diets affected protein and lipid metabolism in broiler chickens. The feeding of contaminated diets altered the immune response in broilers by reducing the total lymphocyte count. Similarly, the antibody response against infectious bronchitis vaccination antigens was decreased (P = 0.003) after feeding contaminated diets, compared with the controls. Moreover, contamination of the broiler diet with DON increased the heteropil:lymphocyte ratio (stress index), suggesting that DON elevated the physiological stress responses of broilers. However, feeding of DON-containing diets did not alter the other plasma constituents, including activities of enzymes. Mycofix select addition to the DON-contaminated feed led to normal immunological and physiological functions in broilers that were comparable with those of the control group, indicating that the addition of the additive to the DON-contaminated feed of the broilers effectively alleviated the alterations caused by DON. It was concluded that broiler performance and some blood and immunological parameters were adversely affected by feeding diets contaminated with the Fusarium mycotoxin DON. However, the dietary Mycofix select supplementation as a detoxifying agent was successful in overcoming the mycotoxin-related effects.

Topical iodophor preparations: chemistry, microbiology, and clinical utility.

Iodophor preparations are commonly used in all medical specialties for antisepsis of the skin prior to injections, invasive procedures, and surgery. Povidone-iodine has some very intriguing properties that make it extremely effective as a broad spectrum bacteriocidal agent with no known bacterial resistance, potentially lending itself to broader applications than its current uses. In this article the background, formulations, chemistry, and microbiology of iodine will be reviewed and recent clinical investigations of utility beyond skin antisepsis will be discussed.