ArticleCureus2025
Chlorhexidine Gluconate Irrigation in the Prevention of Surgical Site Infection Following Cesarean Delivery.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine if the use of 0.05% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) irrigation solution during cesarean delivery (CD) can reduce the post-cesarean surgical site infection (SSI) rate when compared to standard practices without CHG irrigation. MATERIALS AND
methodsA single-center retrospective observational study was performed at a community hospital in Toledo, Ohio. Control and treatment periods were defined, and patients in the treatment group received irrigation with CHG solution during CD, while the control group did not. An electronic medical record review was conducted to note additional perioperative procedures that affect SSI rates. Patients were evaluated for infection at standard postoperative appointments using the CDC criteria, and the hospital system's department of infection prevention provided records of all documented SSIs in both groups. Characteristics of the deliveries and SSIs of each group were compared using the chi-square or Fisher's exact two-tailed tests.
resultsData were available for 351 deliveries after the implementation of the CHG protocol, and 432 deliveries were used as the control group. No significant difference in rates of infection was found between the two groups (p = 0.68). There were significantly more endometritis infections diagnosed in the treatment group compared to the control group (four (1.1%) versus zero; p = 0.04). Compared to the controls, the treatment group had fewer deliveries with the use of silver dressing, more deliveries with a negative pressure dressing, and more deliveries with a diagnosis of pregestational or gestational diabetes (p < 0.05). There were no other differences between the groups, including the use of abdominal and vaginal prep, BMI > 35, and perioperative antibiotics.
conclusionThis single center retrospective observational study revealed no difference in post-cesarean SSI rates when performing intra-abdominal and subcutaneous irrigation with CHG solution. A significant increase in endometritis was observed with the use of CHG irrigation; however, further studies are required to determine the benefit or harm of antimicrobial irrigation in CDs.
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.