Review on the Efficacy, Safety and Clinical Applications of Polihexanide, a Modern Wound Antiseptic

Hübner, N.-O.; Krämer, Axel

doi:10.1159/000318264

Cited by 189 publications

(174 citation statements)

References 108 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

164

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Polyhexamethylene biguanide is also transferred to the cytoplasm where it disrupts the bacterial metabolism. 49,50 Polyhexamethylene biguanides has a broad spectrum of antimicrobial activity against Gram positive and Gram negative bacteria, Chlamydia, Mycoplasma and fungi including Candida and Aspergillus species.…”

Section: © University Of Pretoriamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…50 Polyhexamethylene biguanides are compatible with acids, QAC, and neutral detergents. It has however been shown to be incompatible with anionic detergents, soaps and alkyl sulphates.…”

Section: -54mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It has however been shown to be incompatible with anionic detergents, soaps and alkyl sulphates. 50 Polyhexamethylene biguanides has been shown to have a better antimicrobial efficacy than chlorhexidine under clean and dirty environments. 50 Its antimicrobial activity does not appear to be impaired by the presence of blood or albumin and the optimal pH range is between 5 and 6.…”

Section: -54mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…50 Polyhexamethylene biguanides has been shown to have a better antimicrobial efficacy than chlorhexidine under clean and dirty environments. 50 Its antimicrobial activity does not appear to be impaired by the presence of blood or albumin and the optimal pH range is between 5 and 6. 52,55 No literature is available on the residual action of PHMB.…”

Section: -54mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Comparative efficacy of three antiseptics as surgical skin preparations in dogs

Boucher

Henton²,

Becker

et al. 2018

Veterinary Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To compare the antimicrobial efficacy of a 2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 70% ethanol solution (CG+A) with that of F10 Skin Prep Solution (F10) and electrochemically activated water (EAW) when used as a surgical preparation in canine patients. Study design Prospective randomized clinical study. Sample population One hundred sixteen dogs presented for ovariohysterectomy. Methods Dogs were randomly divided into 1 of the 3 antiseptic groups (CG+A, F10, EAW). Skin samples with replicating organism detection and counting plates were taken at 4 different perioperative sites and time intervals (postskin preparation, postskin antisepsis, 2 hours after the second sample, and at the end of surgery) during ovariohysterectomies performed by students. The colony forming unit (CFU) counts from each sample were quantified according to the level of bacterial contamination. Zero CFU was defined as no contamination, 1‐12 CFU was defined as low contamination, and greater than 12 CFU was defined as high contamination. The 3 antiseptics were compared with respect to the level of contamination. Results There was no difference in the level of colonization between the antiseptics at the first sampling time (P = .454). However, the level of contamination for CG+A was lower compared with F10 and EAW at the second, third, and fourth sampling times (P = .001, P = .01, P = .02, respectively). Conclusion CG+A was more effective at achieving a zero CFU count and low levels of contamination compared with F10 and EAW for surgical preparation in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy. Clinical significance This study does not provide evidence to support the use of F10 and EAW instead of CG+A for the surgical skin preparation of dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy.

show abstract

Section: © University Of Pretoriamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…50 Polyhexamethylene biguanides are compatible with acids, QAC, and neutral detergents. It has however been shown to be incompatible with anionic detergents, soaps and alkyl sulphates.…”

Section: -54mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: -54mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: -54mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparative efficacy of three antiseptics as surgical skin preparations in dogs

Boucher

Henton²,

Becker

et al. 2018

Veterinary Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the use of antiseptic solutions, the characteristics of the individual substances, the type of wound (wound cavities, protein error) as well as the individual risk profile (allergies) of the patient should be taken into consideration [49,51,52].…”

Section: Antisepsis and Breakthrough Of Chronic Inflammationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence‐based topical management of chronic wounds according to the T.I.M.E. principle

Klein

Schreml

Dolderer

et al. 2013

J Deutsche Derma Gesell

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryThe number of patients suffering from chronic wound healing disorders in Germany alone is estimated to be 2.5-4 million. Therapy related expenses reach 5-8 billion Euros annually. This number is partially caused by costly dressing changes due to non-standardized approaches and the application of non-evidence-based topical wound therapies. The purpose of this paper is to elucidate a straightforward principle for the management of chronic wounds, and to review the available evidence for the particular therapy options. The T.I.M.E.-principle (Tissue management, Inflammation and infection control, Moisture balance, Epithelial [edge] advancement) was chosen as a systematic strategy for wound bed preparation. Literature was retrieved from the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases and subjected to selective analysis.Topical wound management should be carried out according to a standardized principle and should further be synchronized to the phases of wound healing. Despite the broad implementation of these products in clinical practice, often no benefit exists in the rate of healing, when evaluated in meta-analyses or systematic reviews. This insufficient evidence is additionally limited by varying study designs. In case of non-superiority, the results suggest to prefer relatively inexpensive wound dressings over expensive alternatives. Arbitrary endpoints to prove the effectiveness of wound dressings, contribute to the random use of such therapies. Defining rational endpoints for future studies as well as the deployment of structured therapy strategies will be essential for the economical and evidence-based management of chronic wounds.

show abstract

The Development of Next‐Generation Pyridinium‐Based multiQAC Antiseptics

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A series of 18 bis- and tris-pyridinium amphiphiles were prepared and tested for both antimicrobial activity and lytic capability, in comparison with the commercially available pyridinium antiseptic cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC). Assessments were made against Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, including two methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) strains. While 2Pyr-11,11 was identified as one of the most potent antimicrobial quaternary ammonium compounds (QACs) reported to date, boasting nanomolar inhibition against five of six bacteria tested, no significant improvement in bioactivity of tris-pyridinium amphiphiles over their bis-pyridinium counterparts was observed. However, the multicationic QACs (multiQACs) presented herein did display significant advantages over the monocationic CPC; while similar red blood cell lysis was observed, superior activity against both Gram-negative bacteria and resistant S. aureus strains led to the discovery of four pyridinium-based multiQACs with advantageous therapeutic indices.

show abstract

Review on the Efficacy, Safety and Clinical Applications of Polihexanide, a Modern Wound Antiseptic

Cited by 189 publications

References 108 publications

Comparative efficacy of three antiseptics as surgical skin preparations in dogs

Comparative efficacy of three antiseptics as surgical skin preparations in dogs

Evidence‐based topical management of chronic wounds according to the T.I.M.E. principle

The Development of Next‐Generation Pyridinium‐Based multiQAC Antiseptics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About