葡萄糖酸氯己定与酒精以及聚六亚甲基双胍与Tris-EDTA作为犬术前皮肤准备消毒溶液的比较评估

Comparative evaluation of chlorhexidine gluconate with alcohol and polyhexamethylene biguanide with Tris-EDTA as antiseptic solutions for pre-operative skin preparation in dogs.

作者信息

Boonwittaya Nithida, Yurayart Chompoonek, Udomkusonsri Pareeya, Kaewmanee Saroch, Sompaisarnsilp Somchai, Thengchaisri Naris, Duangurai Taksaon

机构信息

Department of Companion Animal Clinical Sciences, Graduate Student in Veterinary Clinical Studies, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Kasetsart University, Bangkok 10900, Thailand.

Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Kasetsart University, Bangkok 10900, Thailand.

出版信息

Vet World. 2024 Nov;17(11):2451-2459. doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2024.2451-2459. Epub 2024 Nov 5.

DOI:10.14202/vetworld.2024.2451-2459

PMID:39829670

原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11736384/

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Skin antisepsis plays a crucial role in pre-operative skin preparation, with chlorhexidine gluconate and alcohol being historically the preferred choice. However, concerns have risen regarding the development of bacterial resistance to chlorhexidine. Polyhexamethylene biguanide (PHMB) combined with Tris-ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (Tris-EDTA) has recently emerged as a skin and wound antiseptic. This study aimed to compare the antibacterial efficacy and local safety of 2% chlorhexidine gluconate with 70% alcohol (CG+Alc) and 0.3% PHMB with 6% Tris and 1.86% EDTA (PHMB+Tris-EDTA) for pre-operative skin preparation in dogs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-four adult dogs underwent aseptic preparation on both sides of their ventral abdomens, with one side receiving CG+Alc and the other side receiving PHMB+Tris-EDTA, assigned randomly. Skin swab samples were collected pre-antisepsis and at 3-, 10-, and 60-min post-antisepsis to quantify bacterial colony-forming units (CFUs). Local skin reactions (erythema and edema) were evaluated after hair clipping, pre-antisepsis, and at 3-, 10-, 30-, and 60-min post-antisepsis.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in bacterial CFU counts between the two antiseptic groups pre-antiseptic. Both solutions significantly reduced CFU counts (p < 0.05) at all post-antisepsis sampling times compared with pre-antisepsis. However, dogs treated with PHMB+Tris-EDTA showed a significantly higher incidence of edema at 10 min (p = 0.02) and 30 min (p = 0.003) and a higher incidence of erythema at 10 min (p = 0.043) post-antisepsis compared with CG+Alc. No skin reactions were observed in either group at 60 min post-antisepsis.

CONCLUSION

CG+Alc and PHMB+Tris-EDTA reduced bacterial counts in pre-operative skin preparation in dogs. However, acute transient skin reactions were observed more frequently following the application of PHMB+Tris-EDTA.

摘要

背景与目的

皮肤消毒在术前皮肤准备中起着关键作用，葡萄糖酸氯己定和酒精一直是首选。然而，人们对细菌对氯己定产生耐药性的问题日益担忧。聚六亚甲基双胍（PHMB）与三乙醇四乙酸（Tris-EDTA）组合最近已成为一种皮肤和伤口消毒剂。本研究旨在比较2%葡萄糖酸氯己定与70%酒精（CG+Alc）以及0.3% PHMB与6% Tris和1.86% EDTA（PHMB+Tris-EDTA）用于犬术前皮肤准备的抗菌效果和局部安全性。

材料与方法

24只成年犬在其腹侧腹部两侧进行无菌准备，一侧接受CG+Alc，另一侧接受PHMB+Tris-EDTA，随机分配。在消毒前以及消毒后3分钟、10分钟和60分钟采集皮肤拭子样本，以量化细菌菌落形成单位（CFU）。在剪毛后、消毒前以及消毒后3分钟、10分钟、30分钟和60分钟评估局部皮肤反应（红斑和水肿）。

结果

在消毒前，两个消毒组之间的细菌CFU计数没有显著差异。与消毒前相比，两种溶液在所有消毒后采样时间均显著降低了CFU计数（p < 0.05）。然而，与CG+Alc相比，接受PHMB+Tris-EDTA治疗的犬在消毒后10分钟（p = 0.02）和30分钟（p = 0.003）出现水肿的发生率显著更高，在消毒后10分钟（p = 0.043）出现红斑的发生率更高。在消毒后60分钟，两组均未观察到皮肤反应。