Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Indian Journal of Hematology and Blood Transfusion 1/2018

01-01-2018 | Original Article

Evaluation of the Role of Novel Aprotic Dimethyl Sulfoxide in Cutaneous Antisepsis Protocols Prior to Blood Donor Phlebotomy with Isopropyl Alcohol, Povidone Iodine or Chlorhexidine

Authors: Suchet Sachdev, Nandini Sethuraman, Vikas Gautam, Deepak Pahwa, Anuradha Kalra, Ratti Ram Sharma, Neelam Marwaha, Pallab Ray

Published in: Indian Journal of Hematology and Blood Transfusion | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

The study was planned to measure the reduction of the load of bacterial flora on the blood donor’s arm quantitatively using a three step protocol of donor arm cleansing incorporating either 70% isopropyl alcohol (IPA) or 5% w/v povidone iodine (PVI, 0.5% w/v available iodine) or 4% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) with or without the addition of 5% dimethyl sufloxide (DMSO). Single blind randomized study after obtaining ethical clearance, using the Miles and Misra technique for quantification and matrix assisted laser desorption ionization-mass spectrometry for identification of colony morphotypes on blood donor’s skin. The mean pre-cleansing colony forming units (CFUs) was 89,318 and mean post-cleansing CFUs was 132, with a mean reduction of 99.85% with a mean log reduction of 3.24 (95% CI 2.01–4.47) at a P value of <0.0001. The post-cleansing CFUs was reduced to zero in all 34 samples in the protocol using CHG with DMSO, in 23 of 31 samples in the protocol using PVI with DMSO and 19 of 29 samples in the protocol using IPA with DMSO. The difference in means of the reduction of CFUs in protocols using CHG with DMSO compared with protocols using PVI or IPA with DMSO and PVI or IPA without DMSO was statistically significant with P value of 0.006, 0.0009, 0.015 and 0.05 respectively. The enhanced cutaneous antisepsis effect of CHG when complimented with DMSO in presence of IPA using the three step protocol of donor arm cleansing could stimulate more research and utilization of this as an additional safety towards the prevention of the problem of bacterial contamination of blood and blood components.
Literature
1.
go back to reference EcEntegtart MG (1956) Dangerous contaminants in stored blood. Lancet 271:909–911 EcEntegtart MG (1956) Dangerous contaminants in stored blood. Lancet 271:909–911
2.
go back to reference Pittman M (1953) A study of bacteria implicated in transfusion reactions and bacteria isolated from blood products. J Lab Clin Med 42:273–288PubMed Pittman M (1953) A study of bacteria implicated in transfusion reactions and bacteria isolated from blood products. J Lab Clin Med 42:273–288PubMed
3.
go back to reference Novak M (1939) Preservation of stored blood with sulfanilamide. JAMA 113:2227–2229 Novak M (1939) Preservation of stored blood with sulfanilamide. JAMA 113:2227–2229
4.
go back to reference Strumia MM, McGraw JJ (1941) Frozen and dried plasma for civil and military use. JAMA 116:2378–2382CrossRef Strumia MM, McGraw JJ (1941) Frozen and dried plasma for civil and military use. JAMA 116:2378–2382CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Morrow JF, Braine HG, Kickler TS et al (1991) Septic reactions to platelet transfusions. A persistent problem. JAMA 266:555–558CrossRefPubMed Morrow JF, Braine HG, Kickler TS et al (1991) Septic reactions to platelet transfusions. A persistent problem. JAMA 266:555–558CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Puckett A, Davison G, Entwistle CC, Barbara JAJ (1992) Post transfusion septicaemia 1980–89: importance of donor arm cleansing. J Clin Pathol 45:155–157CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Puckett A, Davison G, Entwistle CC, Barbara JAJ (1992) Post transfusion septicaemia 1980–89: importance of donor arm cleansing. J Clin Pathol 45:155–157CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference McDonald CP, Lowe P, Roy A, Robbins S, Hartley S, Harrison JF et al (2001) Evaluation of donor arm disinfection techniques. Vox Sang 80:135–141CrossRefPubMed McDonald CP, Lowe P, Roy A, Robbins S, Hartley S, Harrison JF et al (2001) Evaluation of donor arm disinfection techniques. Vox Sang 80:135–141CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Perez P, Bruneau C, Chassaigne M, Salmi LR, Noel L, Allouch P et al (2002) Multivariate analysis of determinants of bacterial contamination of whole-blood donations. Vox Sang 82:55–60CrossRefPubMed Perez P, Bruneau C, Chassaigne M, Salmi LR, Noel L, Allouch P et al (2002) Multivariate analysis of determinants of bacterial contamination of whole-blood donations. Vox Sang 82:55–60CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Follea G, Saint-Laurent P, Bigey F, Gayet S, Bientz M, Cazenave JP (1997) Quantitative bacteriological evaluation of a method for skin disinfection in blood donors. Transfus Clin Biol 4:523–531CrossRefPubMed Follea G, Saint-Laurent P, Bigey F, Gayet S, Bientz M, Cazenave JP (1997) Quantitative bacteriological evaluation of a method for skin disinfection in blood donors. Transfus Clin Biol 4:523–531CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Goldman M, Roy G, Frechette N, Decary F, Massicotte L, Delage G (1997) Evaluation of donor skin disinfection methods. Transfusion 37:309–312CrossRefPubMed Goldman M, Roy G, Frechette N, Decary F, Massicotte L, Delage G (1997) Evaluation of donor skin disinfection methods. Transfusion 37:309–312CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Schreiber GB, Arduino MJ, Holt SC, Carson LA, Banerjee SN, Jarvis WR (2001) Transfusion-transmitted bacterial infection in the United States, 1998 through 2000. Transfusion 41:1493–1499CrossRefPubMed Schreiber GB, Arduino MJ, Holt SC, Carson LA, Banerjee SN, Jarvis WR (2001) Transfusion-transmitted bacterial infection in the United States, 1998 through 2000. Transfusion 41:1493–1499CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Stainsby D, Cohen H, Jones H, Knowles S, Milkins C, Charpman C et al (2003) Serious hazards of transfusion (SHOT). SHOT annual report, pp 1–88 Stainsby D, Cohen H, Jones H, Knowles S, Milkins C, Charpman C et al (2003) Serious hazards of transfusion (SHOT). SHOT annual report, pp 1–88
16.
go back to reference Perez P, Salmi LR, Follea G, Schmit JL, de Barbeyrac B, Sudre P et al (2001) Determinants of transfusion associated bacterial contamination: results of the French BACTHEM case-control study. Transfusion 41:862CrossRefPubMed Perez P, Salmi LR, Follea G, Schmit JL, de Barbeyrac B, Sudre P et al (2001) Determinants of transfusion associated bacterial contamination: results of the French BACTHEM case-control study. Transfusion 41:862CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Miles AA, Misra SS, Irwin JO (1938) The estimation of the bactericidal power of the blood. J Hyg (Lond) 38:732–749CrossRef Miles AA, Misra SS, Irwin JO (1938) The estimation of the bactericidal power of the blood. J Hyg (Lond) 38:732–749CrossRef
19.
go back to reference McDonald C, McGuane S, Thomas J, Hartley S, Robbins S, Roy A et al (2010) A novel rapid and effective donor arm disinfection method. Transfusion 50:53–58CrossRefPubMed McDonald C, McGuane S, Thomas J, Hartley S, Robbins S, Roy A et al (2010) A novel rapid and effective donor arm disinfection method. Transfusion 50:53–58CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Wong PY, Colville VL, White V, Walker HM, Morris RA, Microbial Contamination and Infection Control Subcommittee, Australian Red Cross Blood Service (2004) Validation and assessment of a blood-donor arm disinfectant containing chlorhexidine and alcohol. Transfusion 44:1238–1242CrossRefPubMed Wong PY, Colville VL, White V, Walker HM, Morris RA, Microbial Contamination and Infection Control Subcommittee, Australian Red Cross Blood Service (2004) Validation and assessment of a blood-donor arm disinfectant containing chlorhexidine and alcohol. Transfusion 44:1238–1242CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Darouiche RO, Wall MJ Jr, Itani KM, Otterson MF, Webb AL, Carrick MM et al (2010) Chlorhexidine–alcohol versus povidone-iodine for surgical-site antisepsis. N Engl J Med 362:18–26CrossRefPubMed Darouiche RO, Wall MJ Jr, Itani KM, Otterson MF, Webb AL, Carrick MM et al (2010) Chlorhexidine–alcohol versus povidone-iodine for surgical-site antisepsis. N Engl J Med 362:18–26CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Adler MT, Brigger KR, Bishop KD, Mastrobattista JM (2012) Comparison of bactericidal properties of alcohol-based chlorhexidine versus povidone-iodine prior toamniocentesis. Am J Perinatol 29:455–458CrossRefPubMed Adler MT, Brigger KR, Bishop KD, Mastrobattista JM (2012) Comparison of bactericidal properties of alcohol-based chlorhexidine versus povidone-iodine prior toamniocentesis. Am J Perinatol 29:455–458CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Tschudin-Sutter S, Frei R, Egli-Gany D, Eckstein F, Valderrabano V, Dangel M et al (2012) No risk of surgical site infections from residual bacteria after disinfection with povidone-iodine-alcoholin 1014 cases: a prospective observational study. Ann Surg 255:565–569CrossRefPubMed Tschudin-Sutter S, Frei R, Egli-Gany D, Eckstein F, Valderrabano V, Dangel M et al (2012) No risk of surgical site infections from residual bacteria after disinfection with povidone-iodine-alcoholin 1014 cases: a prospective observational study. Ann Surg 255:565–569CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Sistla SC, Prabhu G, Sistla S, Sadasivan J (2010) Minimizing wound contamination in a ‘clean’ surgery: comparison of chlorhexidine-ethanol and povidone-iodine. Chemotherapy 56:261–2677CrossRefPubMed Sistla SC, Prabhu G, Sistla S, Sadasivan J (2010) Minimizing wound contamination in a ‘clean’ surgery: comparison of chlorhexidine-ethanol and povidone-iodine. Chemotherapy 56:261–2677CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Girard R, Comby C, Jacques D (2012) Alcoholic povidone-iodine or chlorhexidine-based antiseptic for the prevention of central venous catheter-related infections: in-use comparison. J Infect Public Health 5:35–42CrossRefPubMed Girard R, Comby C, Jacques D (2012) Alcoholic povidone-iodine or chlorhexidine-based antiseptic for the prevention of central venous catheter-related infections: in-use comparison. J Infect Public Health 5:35–42CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Tarrand JJ, LaSala PR, Han XY, Rolston KV, Kontoyiannis DP (2012) Dimethyl sulfoxide enhances effectiveness of skin antiseptics and reduces contamination rates of blood cultures. J Clin Microbiol 50:1552–1557CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Tarrand JJ, LaSala PR, Han XY, Rolston KV, Kontoyiannis DP (2012) Dimethyl sulfoxide enhances effectiveness of skin antiseptics and reduces contamination rates of blood cultures. J Clin Microbiol 50:1552–1557CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Evaluation of the Role of Novel Aprotic Dimethyl Sulfoxide in Cutaneous Antisepsis Protocols Prior to Blood Donor Phlebotomy with Isopropyl Alcohol, Povidone Iodine or Chlorhexidine
Authors
Suchet Sachdev
Nandini Sethuraman
Vikas Gautam
Deepak Pahwa
Anuradha Kalra
Ratti Ram Sharma
Neelam Marwaha
Pallab Ray
Publication date
01-01-2018
Publisher
Springer India
Published in
Indian Journal of Hematology and Blood Transfusion / Issue 1/2018
Print ISSN: 0971-4502
Electronic ISSN: 0974-0449
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12288-017-0816-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Indian Journal of Hematology and Blood Transfusion 1/2018 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine