Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31213447›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

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.

Matthieu Boisson, Pierre Corbi, Thomas Kerforne, Lionel Camilleri, Mathieu Debauchez, Pierre Demondion, Vedat Eljezi, Erwan Flecher, Didier Lepelletier, Pascal Leprince and 8 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03560193 (An Open Label, Multicenter, Randomized Trial of 2% Chlorhexidine-70% Isopropanol vs 5% Povidone Iodine-69% Ethanol for Skin Antisepsis in Reducing Surgical-site Infection After Cardiac Surgery), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03560193 phase4completednot on this map

An Open Label, Multicenter, Randomized Trial of 2% Chlorhexidine-70% Isopropanol vs 5% Povidone Iodine-69% Ethanol for Skin Antisepsis in Reducing Surgical-site Infection After Cardiac Surgery

TypeinterventionalSponsorPoitiers University HospitalRan2018 to 2022Enrolled3,316ConditionsCardiac Surgery in Adult PatientArms2%Chlorhexidine-70%Isopropanol, 5%Povidone Iodine- 69%Ethanol
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Is the Use of BIMA in CABG Sub-Optimal? A Review of the Current Clinical and Economic Evidence Including Innovative Approaches to the Management of Mediastinitis.Annals of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery : official journal of the Association of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeons of Asia · 2020
    Review
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Matthieu BoissonAnaesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Poitiers, Poitiers, France.ORCID 0000-0003-3667-5782
Pierre CorbiCardiothoracic Surgery Unit, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Poitiers, Poitiers, France.
Thomas KerforneAnaesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Poitiers, Poitiers, France.
Lionel CamilleriCardiothoracic Surgery Unit, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Clermont-Ferrand, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Mathieu DebauchezCardiothoracic Surgery Unit, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France.
Pierre DemondionCardiothoracic Surgery Unit, Hopitaux Universitaires Pitie Salpetriere-Charles Foix, Paris, France.
Vedat EljeziAnaesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Clermont-Ferrand, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Erwan FlecherCardiothoracic Surgery Unit, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes, Rennes, France.
Didier LepelletierInfection Control Unit, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes, Nantes, France.
Pascal LeprinceCardiothoracic Surgery Unit, Hopitaux Universitaires Pitie Salpetriere-Charles Foix, Paris, France.
Nicolas NesselerAnaesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes, Rennes, France.
Jacques Yves NizouInfection Control Unit, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France.
Jean Christian RousselCardiothoracic Surgery Unit, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes, Nantes, France.
Bertrand RozecAnesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes, Nantes, France.
Stéphane RucklyINSERM UMR 1137, Universite Paris Diderot UFR de Medecine Site Xavier-Bichat, Paris, France.
Jean-Christophe LucetInfection Control Unit, Hopital Bichat - Claude-Bernard, Paris, France.
Jean-François TimsitINSERM UMR 1137, Universite Paris Diderot UFR de Medecine Site Xavier-Bichat, Paris, France.
Olivier MimozINSERM U1070, Universite de Poitiers UFR Medecine et Pharmacie, Poitiers, France.ORCID 0000-0003-1737-7915
Inserm · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Clermont-Ferrand · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Poitiers · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes · FRInstitute Mutualiste Montsouris · FRSorbonne Université · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSurgical-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. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 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. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: 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. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: EudraCT 2017-005169-33 and NCT03560193.

Indexed as

Anti-Infective Agents, LocalAntisepsisCardiac Surgical ProceduresPreoperative CareSurgical Wound Infection2-PropanolAdministration, TopicalChlorhexidineEthanolHumansMulticenter Studies as TopicPovidone-IodineRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment Outcome2-PropanolAnti-Infective Agents, LocalChlorhexidineEthanolPovidone-Iodinecardiac surgerychlorhexidinepovidone iodineskin antisepsissurgical-site infection

Identifiers

PMID31213447
PMCPMC6596966
OpenAlexW2956086198

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.