povidone-iodine and Arterial-Occlusive-Diseases

Preoperative and intraoperative antibiotic prophylaxis of infection in peripheral vascular surgery has been widely used although controlled studies have been lacking. A randomized, a prospective, double-blind study of cefazolin versus placebo during 565 arterial reconstructive operations was performed at this hospital from February 1976 through August 1977. Among the 462 patients undergoing surgery of the abdominal aorta and lower extremity vasculature, there was a highly significant difference in the infection rates: 6.8% for placebo recipients versus 0.9% for cefazolin recipients (p less than .001). Of the 18 infections, four involved vascular grafts and all four graft infections occurred in the placebo group. Over 8% of abdominal wounds of patients receiving placebo became infected versus 1.2% of cefazolin patients (p less than .05). Groin wounds were infected infrequently, 1.1% for placebo patients versus none for cefazolin patients. No infections occurred among 103 brachiocephalic procedures. Skin antisepsis was analyzed retrospectively. Infection rates were significantly higher (p less than .01) following hexachlorophene-ethanol versus a povidone-iodine skin preparation. Adverse effects of cefazolin were carefully monitored: no rash, phlebitis, or emergence of resistant strains was observed. A breif perioperative course of cefazolin and povidone-iodine skin antisepsis are recommended in vascular reconstructive surgery of the abdominal aorta and lower extremity vasculature.

Topics: Antisepsis; Arterial Occlusive Diseases; Cefazolin; Cephalosporins; Double-Blind Method; Drug Evaluation; Humans; Infusions, Parenteral; Placebos; Povidone-Iodine; Preoperative Care; Prospective Studies; Skin; Surgical Wound Infection

Four cases of infected vascular prosthetic graft in the groin successfully treated with povidone-iodine solution using a conservative approach are described here. In all patients the same technique was used. After complete debridement, the prosthetic graft in the groin was completely exposed. The wound was cleansed with hydrogen peroxide and then dressed with gauze soaked in 1:10 sterile water-diluted povidone-iodine solution. The dressings were changed twice a day. The patients were supplemented by systemic therapy of an appropriate antibiotic. All patients were observed in the intensive care unit. In all patients this treatment method led to control of infection and healing of the wound. Thus, it was not necessary to remove the prosthetic graft and patients were spared a major surgical intervention. At follow-up, the prosthetic grafts remain patent without any signs of recurrence of infection.

Topics: Aged; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Arterial Occlusive Diseases; Blood Vessel Prosthesis; Enterobacteriaceae Infections; Female; Femoral Artery; Groin; Humans; Iliac Artery; Lower Extremity; Male; Middle Aged; Popliteal Artery; Povidone-Iodine; Prosthesis-Related Infections; Streptococcal Infections