PubMed HealthSearch

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Antisepsis”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

[Asepsis and antisepsis in the treatment of burn patients (author's transl)].

Among the main aspects to be considered when treating burns, the problem of infection control remains unsolved. Considerable financial resources are needed to prevent the transmission of organisms. To justify such investments in buildings and antiseptic measures, an extensive epidemiological hospital study was carried out from 1970 to 1974, involving 930 patients, and more than 25,000 wound biopsies as well as 10,000 contact cultures and environmental swabs. Bacteria from the environment of severly burned patients were counted every week. Serotyping was used for a specialized study of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. In 200 patients wound organisms were counted. The most important organisms were: Streptococcaceae (pyogenic streptococci, less frequently faecal and salivary streptococci). Pseudomonadaceae, Enterobacteriaceae, and Micrococcaceae (especially Micrococcus aureus). Povidon iodine, gentamicin and silver sulfadiazine were used for local disinfection. Antibiotics used were gentamicin, carbenicillin and polymyxin. Whereas from 1970 to 1972 P. aeruginosa was the predominant organism found in wounds, other gram-positive organisms increased from 1972 on. Wounds were colonized mainly in the course of the first two weeks of treatment. Special studies regarding P. aeruginosa revealed a predominance of serotypes 5 and 13 between 1970 and 1973, whereas types brought into the hospital were dominant from 1973 on. An analysis of furniture and equipment, water faucets and drains showed that Pseudomonas strains found in the water did not coincide with those found in wounds. Therefore, a contamination from this source seems unlikely. Strains found on furniture and equipment, however, also appeared in the wound flora. When the therapeutic routine was changed (to prevent patients passing through common treatment areas such as bathrooms and dressing areas) hospital organisms 5 and 13 could be eliminated almost completely. Thus, it is possible to achieve a considerable reduction in the rate of cross-infection among patients by, for instance, excluding common treatment areas from the therapy programme. Nevertheless, in the majority of cases wounds will still be colonized, in particular by bacteria that were already in the anal region or on the skin before the patient was injured. For this reason, the elimination of such organisms by topical bactericidal agents constitutes an an important factor in efforts to reduce the rate of septicaemic complications. In view of the persisting high mortality due to generalized infections this therapeutic aspect must also be exploited thoroughly in the future. Although in comparative studies of topical therapy using povidon iodine, silver sulfadiazine and gentamicin, organisms did appear in the course of the first two weeks; in the case of the PVP-I the colonization never reached 10(5) organisms per cm2, i.e. the danger threshold for generalized sepsis. There was no evidence of a correlation between number of organisms and depth of burns.

Anti-Bacterial Agents

Has medical history importance for surgeons?

Surgeons will do well to remember that the two most important contributions to the growth and extension of surgery came from two disciplines, not then regarded as the most innovative. Anesthesia came from dentistry, the work primarily of W.T.G. Morton of Boston; prophylactic surgical antisepsis originated with the obstetrician Semmelweis, who developed a scheme of prophylactic chemical antisepsis that still remains the core of surgical antisepsis. In the mid 1880's, largely as a result of the work of Chamberland and others of the Pasteur school, surgeons in France and Germany substituted thermal for chemical antisepsis, whenever applicable. Whereas Lister's influence was tremendous in fostering acceptance of antisepsis by surgeons, by the end of his professorial career he had begun his capitulation to prophylactic antisepsis, which was complete by 1896 to the very practices that Semmelweis had proved the value of almost five decades previously. These were 19th century innovations. The greatest boon to surgery's advance in this century has been control of cellulitic infections through chemotherapeutic agencies, the sulfonamides and antibiotics. The tremendous upsurge of interest in research at the end of World War II brought surgeons to a fuller realization of the significant part they could play in the advance of their discipline. Intimate alignment of surgeons with physiologists of the circulation begot intracardiac surgery, a significant innovation with consequences of tremendous import for greater medicine's advance. Today, surgeons attacking the problem of tissue transplantation are aligning themselves with biochemists, geneticists, immunologists, experimental pathologists, and pharmacologists in their broad approach to the phenomenon of allograft rejection. The great extension of vascular surgery since World War II has made jewelers of surgeons of small tubular structures. The technical phases of these demanding operative procedures have largely been overcome. Solution of the biologic rejection phenomenon is awaited eagerly by all investigators, a discovery that will greatly enhance predictable success of transfer of skin as well as of organs. When will surgery experience another great catalytic forward thrust like that achieved through anesthesia, prophylactic antisepsis, and the antibiotics? No discipline in medicine can exist alone without privation. For its continuing advancement, surgery is dependent upon close and intimate relationships with many other medical disciplines. Apart from the enlightenment provided by a searching examination of the origins of our surgical discipline, the earnest and persistent pursuer will discover a lively pleasure and satisfaction that accrues as a special dividend.

Amputation, Surgical

[The history of wound dressings (author's transl)].

The introduction of antisepsis and asepsis brought about decisive changes in the dressing of wounds. For thousands of years, dressing material had been regarded as protection for wounds, absorbent material, or a base for healing substances, while healing per secundam intentionem by the production of "pus laudabile" was the general rule. With the advent of antisepsis, dressings became a type of medication, healing the wounds per primam intentionem. Different materials have been used over the years, but the most important steps in the development of new dressings were made in the nineteenth century, with the introduction of a degreased cotton and of medicated plasters.

Anti-Infective Agents, Local