Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32034427›Full record

ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2020

Sodium hypochlorite is more effective than chlorhexidine for eradication of bacterial biofilm of staphylococci and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

E Röhner, B Jacob, S Böhle, S Rohe, B Löffler, G Matziolis, T Zippelius

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The Effect ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Cytotoxic effect of sodium hypochlorite (Lavanox 0.08%) and chlorhexidine gluconate (Irrisept 0.05%) on human osteoblasts.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

E RöhnerOrthopaedic Department of the Waldkliniken Eisenberg, Orthopaedic Professorship of the University Hospital Jena, Campus Eisenberg, Klosterlausnitzer Straße 81, 07607, Eisenberg, Germany. e.roehner@waldkliniken-eisenberg.de.
B JacobOrthopaedic Department of the Waldkliniken Eisenberg, Orthopaedic Professorship of the University Hospital Jena, Campus Eisenberg, Klosterlausnitzer Straße 81, 07607, Eisenberg, Germany.
S BöhleOrthopaedic Department of the Waldkliniken Eisenberg, Orthopaedic Professorship of the University Hospital Jena, Campus Eisenberg, Klosterlausnitzer Straße 81, 07607, Eisenberg, Germany.
S RoheOrthopaedic Department of the Waldkliniken Eisenberg, Orthopaedic Professorship of the University Hospital Jena, Campus Eisenberg, Klosterlausnitzer Straße 81, 07607, Eisenberg, Germany.
B LöfflerInstitute of Medical Microbiology, Jena University Hospital, 07747, Jena, Germany.
G MatziolisOrthopaedic Department of the Waldkliniken Eisenberg, Orthopaedic Professorship of the University Hospital Jena, Campus Eisenberg, Klosterlausnitzer Straße 81, 07607, Eisenberg, Germany.
T ZippeliusOrthopaedic Department of the Waldkliniken Eisenberg, Orthopaedic Professorship of the University Hospital Jena, Campus Eisenberg, Klosterlausnitzer Straße 81, 07607, Eisenberg, Germany.
Waldkrankenhaus Rudolf Elle · DEJena University Hospital · DE

Funding

Stiftung Endoprothetik S 01/17
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePeriprosthetic infection is a common reason for surgical revision. Given the increasing resistance of bacteria to antibiotics (e.g., VRE, 4-MRGN) local antiseptic treatment is gaining in importance. However, no standard guideline-based treatment recommendation is yet available. The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine against bacterial biofilms. Furthermore, the toxicity of both antiseptics towards human chondrocytes was examined.

methodsHuman chondrocytes were isolated, cultivated and treated with sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine. The viability of cultures was assessed by determination of cell count, XTT and MTT ELISAs, and fluorescent staining with propidium iodide. Bacterial strains of Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were added to liquid media and incubated overnight. After determination of bacterial concentrations polyethylene (PE) devices were inoculated with bacteria for 48 h until biofilms formed. The devices were then washed, treated with antiseptics for 2 and 5 min and subsequently spread on agar plates.

resultsSodium hypochlorite is more effective than chlorhexidine in penetrating biofilms of S. aureus, S. epidermidis and P. aeruginosa. Both antiseptics are chondrotoxic, but sodium hypochlorite damages human chondrocytes less than chlorhexidine in vitro.

conclusionsThe findings confirm the effectiveness of sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine against bacterial biofilms. Both antiseptics can be recommended for the treatment of periprosthetic infections. The toxic effects of sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine towards chondrocytes may mean there is a risk of damage to cartilage tissue. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Controlled experimental study.

Indexed as

Anti-Infective Agents, LocalBiofilmsChlorhexidineChondrocytesHumansProsthesis-Related InfectionsPseudomonas aeruginosaSodium HypochloriteStaphylococcus aureusStaphylococcus epidermidisAnti-Infective Agents, LocalChlorhexidineSodium HypochloriteBacterial biofilmCell damageChlorhexidineHuman chondrocytesPeriprosthetic infectionSodium hypochlorite

Identifiers

PMID32034427
OpenAlexW3004942112

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.