Trial reportLangenbeck's archives of surgery2020
Disinfection with single or double usage of new antiseptic olanexidine gluconate in general surgery: a randomized study.
Trial report in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of olanexidine versus povidone-iodine as a preoperative antiseptic for reducing surgical site infection in both scheduled and emergency gastrointestinal surgeries: A single-center randomized clinical trial.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2023Article
- Propensity-matched analysis of the efficacy of olanexidine gluconate versus chlorhexidine-alcohol as an antiseptic agent in thoracic esophagectomy.BMC surgery · 2022Article
- Clinical application of skin antisepsis using aqueous olanexidine: a scoping review.Acute medicine & surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeOlanexidine gluconate is a newly developed solution for skin disinfection that was recently approved in Japan. We aimed to compare single and double application of the solution in preventing surgical site infection (SSI) in patients undergoing general surgery.
methodsThis randomized study was conducted at the Tottori University Hospital. Patients scheduled to undergo gastrointestinal or hernia surgery were randomly assigned to one of two groups using either one or two Olanedine applicators for skin disinfection. The primary endpoint was the difference in SSI incidence between the two groups. The secondary endpoint was all adverse events related to olanexidine gluconate.
resultsA total of 393 patients qualified for the study protocol: 193 received a single application, and 200 received a double application of Olanedine. SSI occurred in 10 patients (2.5%) overall; nine were superficial incisional SSIs, and one patient had a deep incisional SSI. Of the 10 patients who developed SSI, six (3.1%) were in the group receiving a single application, and four (2.0%) were in the group receiving a double application; there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.537). Allergic reactions or skin disorders related to olanexidine gluconate were not observed.
conclusionThere was no difference in the SSI incidence between the use of one or two Olanedine applicators for skin preparation in elective general surgery. Therefore, a single application of Olanedine is sufficient and is recommended for general surgery as a standard disinfection precaution. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000027319; 5/12/2017.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.