• E F Magann, M K Dodson, M A Ray, R L Harris, J N Martin, and J C Morrison.
• Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson.
• Obstet Gynecol. 1993 Jun 1; 81 (6): 922-5.

ObjectiveTo determine the impact of two skin preparation methods and two techniques of pelvic irrigation on the incidence of post-cesarean endometritis and wound infection in an indigent patient population.MethodsA randomized study was performed in 100 cesarean patients. Subjects were assigned to one of four groups, involving either standard skin preparation (povidone-iodine [7.5%] scrub followed by povidone-iodine [10%] solution) or special skin preparation (5-minute scrub with parachlorometaxylenol followed by povidone scrub and solution), and either normal saline or antibiotic (cefazolin sodium, 1 g in 500 mL normal saline) irrigation of the pelvis and subcutaneous tissue at uterine and fascial closure. Four groups of patients were formed: standard skin preparation plus normal saline irrigation, standard preparation plus antibiotic irrigation, special preparation plus normal saline irrigation, and special preparation plus antibiotic irrigation.ResultsEndometritis occurred significantly more often in the combined groups that did not include antibiotic irrigation than in the combined groups involving antibiotic irrigation (P < .001). In contrast, comparison of skin preparation methods between povidone-iodine alone versus preparation including parachlorometaxylenol indicated no significant difference (P = .22).ConclusionSkin preparation with an antibacterial scrub in addition to standard povidone-iodine scrub and solution does not appear to play as significant a role in the reduction of post-cesarean endometritis or wound infection as does intraoperative pelvic irrigation with antibiotic solution.

25 keywords...

hide…