1887

Abstract

To determine the bactericidal efficacy of a new topical antiseptic for preoperative skin preparation, olanexidine gluconate (development code: OPB-2045G), against transient or resident bacterial flora on the skin of cynomolgus monkeys.

After measuring baseline bacterial counts on test sites marked on the abdomens, we applied olanexidine, chlorhexidine or povidone–iodine. After 10 min (fast-acting effect) and 6 h (long-lasting effect), bacterial counts were measured again and log reductions were calculated. In addition, we determined the bactericidal effects on the skin contaminated with blood before or after applying the antiseptics.

In the non-blood-contaminated condition, the mean log reductions of olanexidine at doses of 1–2 % were significantly higher than those of saline (negative control), but did not significantly differ from those of 0.5 % chlorhexidine and 10 % povidone–iodine at either time point. But olanexidine was significantly more effective at both time points than chlorhexidine and povidone–iodine when applied after the site was contaminated with blood. Olanexidine was also significantly more effective than chlorhexidine and as effective as or more effective than povidone-iodine at both time points when skin was contaminated with blood after the antiseptics were applied.

The bactericidal effects of olanexidine were comparable to those of commercial antiseptics such as chlorhexidine and povidone–iodine in non-blood-contaminated conditions. More importantly, the effect of olanexidine was hardly affected by blood unlike commercial antiseptics. Thus, it is considered that olanexidine has a favourable property for skin preparation in various types of surgical treatments.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000462
2017-05-01
2020-12-04
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmm/66/5/678.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000462&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Zamora JL, Price MF, Chuang P, Gentry LO. Inhibition of povidone-iodine's bactericidal activity by common organic substances: an experimental study. Surgery 1985;98:25–29[PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Koburger T, Hübner NO, Braun M, Siebert J, Kramer A. Standardized comparison of antiseptic efficacy of triclosan, PVP-iodine, octenidine dihydrochloride, polyhexanide and chlorhexidine digluconate. J Antimicrob Chemother 2010;65:1712–1719 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Fuursted K, Hjort A, Knudsen L. Evaluation of bactericidal activity and lag of regrowth (postantibiotic effect) of five antiseptics on nine bacterial pathogens. J Antimicrob Chemother 1997;40:221–226 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Kobayashi H, Tsuzuki M, Hosobuchi K. Bactericidal effects of antiseptics and disinfectants against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1989;10:562–564 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Kampf G, Höfer M, Wendt C. Efficacy of hand disinfectants against vancomycin-resistant enterococci in vitro. J Hosp Infect 1999;42:143–150 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Inoue Y, Hagi A, Nii T, Tsubotani Y, Nakata H et al. Novel antiseptic compound OPB-2045G shows potent bactericidal activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus both in vitro and in vivo: a pilot study in animals. J Med Microbiol 2015;64:32–36 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Hagi A, Iwata K, Nii T, Nakata H, Tsubotani Y et al. Bactericidal effects and mechanism of action of olanexidine gluconate, a new antiseptic. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2015;59:4551–4559 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Lambert RJW. Evaluation of antimicrobial efficacy. In Fraise AP, Maillard JY, Lambert PA. (editors) Russell, Hugo & Ayliffe’s: Principles and Practice of Disinfection, Preservation and Sterilization, 4th ed. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell; 2008; pp.345–360
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Reybrouck G. The testing of disinfectants. Int Biodeterior Biodegradation 1998;41:269–272 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Bush LW, Benson LM, White JH. Pig skin as test substrate for evaluating topical antimicrobial activity. J Clin Microbiol 1986;24:343–348[PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Messager S, Goddard PA, Dettmar PW, Maillard JY. Determination of the antibacterial efficacy of several antiseptics tested on skin by an 'ex-vivo' test. J Med Microbiol 2001;50:284–292 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Stubbs WP, Bellah JR, Vermaas-Hekman D, Purich B, Kubilis PS. Chlorhexidine gluconate versus chloroxylenol for preoperative skin preparation in dogs. Vet Surg 1996;25:487–494 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Deuel DM, Michaud RN, Arneson VG, Sedlock DM. Utilization of chlorhexidine gluconate to evaluate a nonhuman primate skin-degerming model. J Med Primatol 1983;13:105–116
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Sedlock DM, Bailey DM. Microbicidal activity of octenidine hydrochloride, a new alkanediylbis[pyridine] germicidal agent. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1985;28:786–790 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. ASTM International E1054-08, Standard Test Methods for Evaluation of Inactivators of Antimicrobial Agents West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International; 2013
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Carty N, Wibaux A, Ward C, Paulson DS, Johnson P. Antimicrobial activity of a novel adhesive containing chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) against the resident microflora in human volunteers. J Antimicrob Chemother 2014;69:2224–2229 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Reichel M, Heisig P, Kohlmann T, Kampf G. Alcohols for skin antisepsis at clinically relevant skin sites. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2009;53:4778–4782 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Devriese LA, Schleifer KH, Adegoke GO. Identification of coagulase-negative staphylococci from farm animals. J Appl Bacteriol 1985;58:45–55 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Devriese LA, Nzuambe D, Godard C. Identification and characteristics of staphylococci isolated from lesions and normal skin of horses. Vet Microbiol 1985;10:269–277 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Nagase N, Sasaki A, Yamashita K, Shimizu A, Wakita Y et al. Isolation and species distribution of staphylococci from animal and human skin. J Vet Med Sci 2002;64:245–250 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Kloos WE, Zimmerman RJ, Smith RF. Preliminary studies on the characterization and distribution of Staphylococcus and Micrococcus species on animal skin. Appl Environ Microbiol 1976;31:53–59[PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Sørum H, Sunde M. Resistance to antibiotics in the normal flora of animals. Vet Res 2001;32:227–241 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Scott DW, Miller WT, Griffin CE. Bacterial skin diseases. In Muller and Kirk’s Small Animal Dermatology, 6th ed. Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders Co.; 2001; pp.274–335[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Hariharan H, Matthew V, Fountain J, Snell A, Doherty D et al. Aerobic bacteria from mucous membranes, ear canals, and skin wounds of feral cats in Grenada, and the antimicrobial drug susceptibility of major isolates. Comp Immunol Microbiol Infect Dis 2011;34:129–134 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Haarstad AC, Eisenschenk MC, Heinrich NA, Weese JS, Mckeever PJ. Isolation of bacterial skin flora of healthy sheep, with comparison between frequent and minimal human handling. Vet Dermatol 2014;25:215–221 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Galuppo LD, Pascoe JR, Jang SS, Willits NH, Greenman SL. Evaluation of iodophor skin preparation techniques and factors influencing drainage from ventral midline incisions in horses. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1999;215:963–969[PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Hague BA, Honnas CM, Simpson RB, Peloso JG. Evaluation of skin bacterial flora before and after aseptic preparation of clipped and nonclipped arthrocentesis sites in horses. Vet Surg 1997;26:121–125 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Sancho E, Caballero M, Ruíz-Martínez I. The associated microflora to the larvae of human bot fly Dermatobia hominis L. Jr. (Diptera: Cuterebridae) and its furuncular lesions in cattle. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 1996;91:293–298 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000462
Loading
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000462
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most cited this month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error