Copyright
©The Author(s) 2016.
World J Clin Pediatr. May 8, 2016; 5(2): 159-171
Published online May 8, 2016. doi: 10.5409/wjcp.v5.i2.159
Published online May 8, 2016. doi: 10.5409/wjcp.v5.i2.159
Ref. | Design/type | Patient characteristics (n) | Type of antiseptic used | Purpose of antisepsis | Adverse reaction | Systemic effects | Comments |
Garland et al[78] | Prospective study | Neonates (n = 111) | 0.5% CHG in 70% IPA | PICC insertion | None reported | Not reported | GA not reported |
Garland et al[79] | RCT | Neonates (n = 335, including 98 babies < 1000 g) | 0.5% CHG and 70% IPA, CHG impregnated dressing after cleansing | PICC insertion | 19 cases of contact dermatitis of which 15 are < 1000 g | Not reported | Occlusive dressing could be the cause of contact dermatitis |
Bührer et al[102] | Prospective study | Preterm < 27 wk GA (n = 24) | 2% phenoxyethanol and 0.1% octenidine | Skin care | Transient erythema in a 23 wk gestation baby | Absorbed systemically but no adverse effects reported | |
Pezzati et al[57] | RCT | Preterm < 34 wk (n = 101) | 4% CHG aqueous solution | Umbilical cord care | None | Not reported | Mostly above 28 wk |
Andersen et al[37] | Prospective study | VLBW < 1500 g (n = 36) | 2% aqueous CHG | PICC, cannula insertion | Skin erythema and burn | Not reported | Recommended alternative safer agent |
Visscher et al[22] | Pilot study | Neonates (n = 40; 14 of which < 30 wk ) | 2% CHG in 70% IPA | PICC insertion | Erythema and dryness | Not reported | Could be from dressing |
Schick et al[98] | Case report | Preterm < 28 wk GA (n = 2) | IPA | Umbilical catheterisation | Skin burn (2nd/3rd degree burn) | Not reported | |
Harpin et al[95] | Case report | Preterm 27 wk GA (n = 1) | Methylated spirit (95% ethanol and 5% wood naptha) | Umbilical catheterisation | Haemorrhagic skin necrosis | Very high ethanol and methanol levels in blood | Use of alcohol antiseptics in preterm neonates potentially dangerous |
Watkins et al[99] | Case report | Extreme LBW babies (n = 2) | Iso propyle alcohol | Umbilical catheterisation | Skin burns | Not reported | Care must be taken in selection of such solutions |
Brayer et al[100] | Case report | Preterm at 35 wk (n = 1) | Isopropyl alcohol | Umbilical catheterisation | Severe skin burn | Not reported | |
Reynolds et al[96] | Case report | Preterm infants 24 wk (n = 2) | 0.5% CHG + 70% methanol | Umbilical catheterisation | Extensive abdominal skin burns | Not reported | Avoid pooling of the antiseptic solution and use Saline for cleaning to wash antiseptic |
Mannan et al[101] | Case report | Preterm 26 wk GA (n = 1) | 0.5% CHG + 70% alcohol | Umbilical catheterisation | Extensive abdominal skin burns | Not reported | Alcohol containing preparations should be avoided in NICUs |
Bringué Espuny et al[97] | Case report | Preterm 26 wk (n = 2) | 0.5% CHG + methanol | Umbilical catheterisation | Skin burns | Not reported | Use of alcoholic preparations should be avoided in preterm |
Lashkari et al[103] | Case report | Preterm 25 wk GA (n = 1) | 2% aqueous CHG | Umbilical catheterisation | Skin burn | Not reported | Cleansing with Normal saline could potentially reduce the exposure and burns |
- Citation: Sathiyamurthy S, Banerjee J, Godambe SV. Antiseptic use in the neonatal intensive care unit - a dilemma in clinical practice: An evidence based review. World J Clin Pediatr 2016; 5(2): 159-171
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2219-2808/full/v5/i2/159.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5409/wjcp.v5.i2.159