Protocol for a randomised controlled trial comparing aqueous with alcoholic chlorhexidine antisepsis for the prevention of superficial surgical site infection after minor surgery in general practice: the AVALANCHE trial.

Surgical site infection (SSI) after minor skin excisions has a significant impact on patient morbidity and healthcare resources. Skin antisepsis prior to surgical incision is used to prevent SSI, and is performed routinely worldwide. However, in spite of the routine use of skin antisepsis, there is no consensus regarding which antiseptic agents are most effective. The AVALANCHE trial will compare Aqueous Versus Alcoholic Antisepsis with Chlorhexidine for Skin Excisions. The study design is a prospective, randomised controlled trial (RCT) with the aim of investigating the impact of two different antiseptic preparations on the incidence of superficial SSI in patients undergoing minor skin excisions. The intervention of 0.5% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) in 70% alcohol will be compared with that of 0.5% CHG in aqueous solution. The trial will be conducted in four Australian general practices over a 9-month period, with 920 participants to be recruited. Consecutive patients presenting for minor skin excisions will be eligible to participate. Randomisation will be on the level of the patient. The primary outcome is superficial SSI in the first 30 days following the excision. Secondary outcomes will be adverse effects, including anaphylaxis, skin irritation, contact dermatitis and rash and patterns of antibiotic resistance. The study has been approved by the James Cook University Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC). Findings will be disseminated in conference presentations and journals and through online electronic media. RCTs conducted in general practice differ from hospital-based projects in terms of feasibility, pragmatism and funding. The success of this trial will be cemented in the fact that the research question was established by a group of general practitioners who identified an interesting question which is relevant to their clinical practice and not answered by current evidence. ACTRN12615001045505; Pre-results.

Heal CF ，Charles D ，Hardy A ，Delpachitra M ，Banks J ，Wohlfahrt M ，Saednia S ，Buettner P ... -  《BMJ Open》

Alcoholic Chlorhexidine or Alcoholic Iodine Skin Antisepsis (ACAISA): protocol for cluster randomised controlled trial of surgical skin preparation for the prevention of superficial wound complications in prosthetic hip and knee replacement surgery.

Wound complications following arthroplasty are associated with significant impact on the patient and healthcare system. Skin cleansing prior to surgical incision is a simple and effective method to prevent wound complications however, the question of which agent is superior for surgical skin antisepsis is unresolved. This cluster randomised controlled trial aims to compare the incidence of superficial wound complications in patients undergoing elective prosthetic hip or knee replacement surgery receiving surgical skin antisepsis with either: 0.5% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) in 70% alcohol or 10% povidone in 70% alcohol. The trial will be conducted at an Australian tertiary, university affiliated hospital over a 3-year period involving 750 participants. Participants will be drawn from the surgical waiting list. Consent for this study will be 'opt-out' consent. On a given day, all eligible participants will have skin preparation either with 0.5% chlorhexidine in 70% alcohol or 10% povidone iodine in 70% alcohol. The primary outcome is superficial wound complications (comprised of superficial incisional surgical site infections (SSI) and/or prolonged wound ooze) in the first 30 days following prosthetic joint replacement surgery. Secondary outcomes will include the incidence of wound complications according to the joint replaced, assessment of the causative agents of SSI and cost-effectiveness analysis. The primary analysis is an intention-to-treat analysis including all participants who undergo randomisation and will be performed at the individual level taking into account the clustering effect. The study design and protocol was reviewed and approved by the St Vincent's Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC-A 016/14 10/3/2014). Study findings will be disseminated in the printed media, and learned forums. A written lay summary will be available to study participants on request. The trial has been registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12614000177651.

Peel TN ，Cheng AC ，Buising KL ，Dowsey MM ，Choong PF ... -  《BMJ Open》

Alcoholic versus aqueous chlorhexidine for skin antisepsis: the AVALANCHE trial.

Preoperative skin antisepsis is routine practice. We compared alcoholic chlorhexidine with aqueous chlorhexidine for skin antisepsis to prevent surgical site infection after minor skin excisions in general practice. We conducted this prospective, multicentre, randomized controlled trial in 4 private general practices in North Queensland, Australia, from October 2015 to August 2016. Consecutive adult patients presenting for minor skin excisions were randomly assigned to undergo preoperative skin antisepsis with 0.5% chlorhexidine in 70% ethanol (intervention) or 0.5% chlorhexidine aqueous solution (control). Our primary outcome was surgical site infection within 30 days of excision. We also measured the incidence of adverse reactions. A total of 916 patients were included in the study: 454 underwent antisepsis with alcoholic chlorhexidine and 462 with aqueous chlorhexidine. Of these, 909 completed follow-up. In the intention-to-treat analysis of cases available at follow-up, there was no significant difference in the incidence of surgical site infection between the alcoholic chlorhexidine arm (5.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.6% to 7.9%) and the aqueous chlorhexidine arm (6.8%, 95% CI 4.5% to 9.1%). The attributable risk reduction was 0.010 (95% CI -0.021 to 0.042), the relative risk was 0.85 (95% CI 0.51 to 1.41), and the number needed to treat to benefit was 100. Per protocol and sensitivity analyses produced similar results. The incidence of adverse reactions was low, with no difference between groups (p = 0.6). There was no significant difference in efficacy between alcoholic and aqueous chlorhexidine for the prevention of surgical site infection after minor skin excisions in general practice. Trial registration: https://www.anzctr.org.au, no. ACTRN12615001045505.

Charles D ，Heal CF ，Delpachitra M ，Wohlfahrt M ，Kimber D ，Sullivan J ，Browning S ，Saednia S ，Hardy A ，Banks J ，Buttner P ... -  《-》

Multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled clinical trial comparing 2% chlorhexidine-70% isopropanol and 5% povidone iodine-69% ethanol for skin antisepsis in reducing surgical-site infection after cardiac surgery: the CLEAN 2 study protocol.

Surgical-site infection (SSI) is the second most frequent cause of healthcare-associated infection worldwide and is associated with increased morbidity, mortality and healthcare costs. Cardiac surgery is clean surgery with low incidence of SSI, ranging from 2% to 5%, but with potentially severe consequences.Perioperative skin antisepsis with an alcohol-based antiseptic solution is recommended to prevent SSI, but the superiority of chlorhexidine (CHG)-alcohol over povidone iodine (PVI)-alcohol, the two most common alcohol-based antiseptic solutions used worldwide, is controversial. We aim to evaluate whether 2% CHG-70% isopropanol is more effective than 5% PVI-69% ethanol in reducing the incidence of reoperation after cardiac surgery. The CLEAN 2 study is a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled clinical trial of 4100 patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Patients will be randomised in 1:1 ratio to receive either 2% CHG-70% isopropanol or 5% PVI-69% ethanol for perioperative skin preparation. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients undergoing any re-sternotomy between day 0 and day 90 after initial surgery and/or any reoperation on saphenous vein/radial artery surgical site between day 0 and day 30 after initial surgery. Data will be analysed on the intention-to-treat principle. This protocol has been approved by an independent ethics committee and will be carried out according to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and the Good Clinical Practice guidelines. The results of this study will be disseminated through presentation at scientific conferences and publication in peer-reviewed journals. EudraCT 2017-005169-33 and NCT03560193.

Boisson M ，Corbi P ，Kerforne T ，Camilleri L ，Debauchez M ，Demondion P ，Eljezi V ，Flecher E ，Lepelletier D ，Leprince P ，Nesseler N ，Nizou JY ，Roussel JC ，Rozec B ，Ruckly S ，Lucet JC ，Timsit JF ，Mimoz O ... -  《BMJ Open》

Effect of aqueous olanexidine versus alcohol-based chlorhexidine for surgical skin antisepsis on incidence of surgical site infections in gastrointestinal surgery: multicentre randomised controlled clinical trial (OEDO trial) protocol.

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are among the most common nosocomial infections in surgery patients. Two types of preparations, povidone-iodine and chlorhexidine-alcohol, are commonly used in preoperative antiseptic procedures worldwide. However, there are inconsistencies among international guideline recommendations concerning skin antiseptics. This trial aimed to evaluate the superiority of olanexidine, which reduced SSI rates more than povidone-iodine in our previous randomised trial, over chlorhexidine-alcohol in clean-contaminated surgery. This multicentre randomised controlled clinical trial will compare two antiseptics (1.5% olanexidine and 1.0% chlorhexidine-alcohol) to prevent SSI in clean-contaminated gastrointestinal surgeries with surgical wounds. On providing consent, patients aged <18 years will be included. The primary outcome will be the postoperative 30-day overall SSI rate, while the secondary outcomes will be the postoperative 30-day superficial incisional SSI rate, deep incisional SSI rate, organ/space SSI rate, positive bacterial wound culture rate, cultured bacterial strains, rates of intervention-related toxicity and allergic events (eg, erythema, pruritus, dermatitis and other symptoms of allergy around the region disinfected by the antiseptic during surgery), rate of reoperations due to SSI, medical economic effect indicators (based on health insurance claims) and hospital duration. The Mantel-Haenszel method will be used to estimate the adjusted risk ratio and its 95% CI for the primary analysis, which will compare the treatment effects. The protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Keio University School of Medicine and subsequently by the board of each participating site. Participant recruitment began in January 2023. The final results will be published in medical journals after international peer review. UMIN000049712.

Takeuchi M ，Obara H ，Furube T ，Kawakubo H ，Kitago M ，Okabayashi K ，Aoyama J ，Amemiya R ，Fujisaki H ，Sano J ，Goto R ，Sato Y ，Kitagawa Y ... -  《BMJ Open》