Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY.
Institute of Human Nutrition, Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Columbia University, New York, NY.
Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2020 Aug;2(3):100114. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2020.100114. Epub 2020 Apr 15.
Precesarean vaginal preparation significantly reduces postpartum infections. Although povidone-iodine is the most commonly used vaginal antiseptic, evidence suggests that chlorhexidine gluconate may be more effective.
We aimed to compare the bactericidal effect of chlorhexidine gluconate and povidone-iodine on vaginal bacterial colony counts in pregnancy.
We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial of vaginal preparation with 0.5% chlorhexidine gluconate vs 10% povidone-iodine vs saline in women undergoing cesarean delivery at ≥34 weeks' gestation. Women in labor or those with ruptured membranes, chorioamnionitis, abnormal placentation, or allergy to study agents were excluded. Vaginal specimens were collected aseptically in the operating room immediately before and 5-10 minutes after vaginal cleansing with 3 sterile sponge sticks. Our primary outcome was postintervention aerobic and anaerobic bacterial colony counts, assessed by blinded investigators. Two-way analysis of variance with simple-effects analysis and Tukey post hoc test were used for multiple group comparisons. Secondary outcomes included baseline colony counts, change in colony counts, adverse events, and maternal infections.
A total of 29 women consented and underwent vaginal preparation with chlorhexidine gluconate (n=10), povidone-iodine (n=9), or saline (n=10). Groups were similar with respect to maternal age, body mass index, race, ethnicity, parity, group B streptococcus status, and gestational age. There were no differences in baseline colony counts. Vaginal preparation with povidone-iodine resulted in lower aerobic and anaerobic colony counts compared with chlorhexidine gluconate and saline (P≤.01 and P≤.0001, respectively). Povidone-iodine eliminated more than 99.9% of bacteria, whereas chlorhexidine gluconate and saline eliminated more than 99% and 95% of bacteria, respectively. Although all agents decreased aerobic and anaerobic bacterial counts, 0.5% chlorhexidine gluconate was no more effective than saline in reducing anaerobic bacteria. There were no reported adverse effects or postpartum infections.
Compared with 0.5% chlorhexidine gluconate, 10% povidone-iodine was more effective in reducing vaginal bacterial colony counts before cesarean delivery.
剖宫产术前阴道准备可显著降低产后感染。虽然聚维酮碘是最常用的阴道消毒剂,但有证据表明葡萄糖酸氯己定可能更有效。
我们旨在比较葡萄糖酸氯己定和聚维酮碘对妊娠期间阴道细菌菌落计数的杀菌效果。
我们进行了一项前瞻性随机对照试验,比较 0.5%葡萄糖酸氯己定、10%聚维酮碘和生理盐水在≥34 周妊娠行剖宫产术的孕妇中的阴道准备效果。排除临产或胎膜破裂、绒毛膜羊膜炎、异常胎盘、或对研究药物过敏的孕妇。在手术室无菌条件下,用 3 个无菌海绵棒在阴道清洁前后即刻和 5-10 分钟时采集阴道标本。盲法研究者评估干预后的需氧和厌氧细菌菌落计数,作为主要结局。采用双因素方差分析和简单效应分析及 Tukey 事后检验进行多组比较。次要结局包括基线菌落计数、菌落计数变化、不良事件和产妇感染。
共有 29 名孕妇同意并接受了葡萄糖酸氯己定(n=10)、聚维酮碘(n=9)或生理盐水(n=10)阴道准备。各组产妇年龄、体重指数、种族、民族、产次、B 组链球菌状态和孕周无差异。基线菌落计数无差异。与葡萄糖酸氯己定和生理盐水相比,聚维酮碘可降低需氧和厌氧菌落计数(P≤0.01 和 P≤0.0001)。聚维酮碘消除了>99.9%的细菌,而葡萄糖酸氯己定和生理盐水分别消除了>99%和 95%的细菌。虽然所有药物均降低了需氧和厌氧细菌计数,但 0.5%葡萄糖酸氯己定在减少厌氧菌方面并不优于生理盐水。未报告不良事件或产后感染。
与 0.5%葡萄糖酸氯己定相比,10%聚维酮碘在剖宫产术前更能有效降低阴道细菌菌落计数。