This study presents a comparative investigation of the antimicrobial efficacy of the antiseptics PVP–iodine, triclosan, chlorhexidine, octenidine and polyhexanide used for pre-surgical antisepsis and antiseptic treatment of skin, wounds and mucous membranes based on internationally accepted standards. MICs and MBCs were determined in accordance with DIN 58940-7 and 58940-8 using Staphylococcus aureus (including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus), Enterococcus faecalis (including vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus), Streptococcus pneumoniae, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Clostridium perfringens, Haemophilus influenzae and Candida albicans. The microbicidal efficacy was determined in accordance with DIN EN 1040 and 1275 using S. aureus, P. aeruginosa and C. albicans. For chlorhexidine, octenidine and polyhexanide, MIC₄₈ and MBC₂₄ ranged from 16 to 32 mg/L. Maximum values for triclosan ranged from 256 to 512 mg/L, with an efficacy gap against P. aeruginosa, while the maximum values of PVP–iodine were 1024 mg/L, with a gap against S. pneumoniae. Comparing the minimal effective concentrations, octenidine was most effective. After 1 min, only octenidine and PVP–iodine fulfil the requirements for antiseptics. Tests under standardized and harmonized conditions help to choose the most efficacious agent. When a prolonged contact time is feasible, ranking of agents would be polyhexanide = octenidine > chlorhexidine > triclosan > PVP–iodine. This is consistent with the recommendations for antisepsis of acute wounds. Polyhexanide seems to be preferable for chronic wounds due to its higher tolerability. If an immediate effect is required, ranking would be octenidine = PVP–iodine≫ polyhexanide > chlorhexidine > triclosan.

The rate of microscopic incomplete resections of gastrointestinal cancers including pancreatic cancer has not changed considerably over the past years. Future intra-operative applications of tissue tolerable plasmas (TTP) could help to address this problem. Plasma is generated by feeding energy, like electrical discharges, to gases. The development of non-thermal atmospheric plasmas displaying spectra of temperature within or just above physiological ranges allows biological or medical applications of plasmas.

In recent years, extended-spectrum β-lactamases (ESBL) producing bacteria have been found in livestock, mainly as asymptomatic colonizers. The zoonotic risk for people working in close contact to animal husbandry has still not been completely assessed. Therefore, we investigated the prevalence of ESBL-producing Escherichia spp. in livestock animals and workers to determine the potential risk for an animal-human cross-transmission.In Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, northeast Germany, inguinal swabs of 73 individuals with livestock contact from 23 different farms were tested for ESBL-producing Escherichia spp. Two pooled fecal samples per farm of animal origin from 34 different farms (17 pig farms, 11 cattle farms, 6 poultry farms) as well as cloacal swabs of 10 randomly selected broilers or turkeys were taken at each poultry farm. For identification, selective chromogenic agar was used after an enrichment step. Phenotypically ESBL-producing isolates (n = 99) were tested for CTX-M, OXA, SHV and TEM using PCR, and isolates were further characterized using multilocus sequence typing (MLST). In total, 61 diverse isolates from different sources and/or different MLST/PCR results were acquired. Five farm workers (three from cattle farms and two from pig farms) harbored ESBL-producing E. coli. All human isolates harbored the CTX-M β-lactamase; TEM and OXA β-lactamases were additionally detected in two, resp. one, isolates. ESBL-producing Escherichia spp. were found in fecal samples at pig (15/17), cattle (6/11) and poultry farms (3/6). In total, 70.6% (24/36) of the tested farms were ESBL positive. Furthermore, 9 out of 60 cloacal swabs turned out to be ESBL positive. All isolated ESBL-producing bacteria from animal sources were E. coli, except for one E. hermanii isolate. CTX-M was the most prevalent β-lactamase at cattle and pig farms, while SHV predominated in poultry. One human isolate shared an identical MLST sequence type (ST) 3891 and CTX-M allele to the isolate found in the cattle fecal sample from the same farm, indicating a zoonotic transfer. Two other pairs of human-pig and human-cattle E. coli isolates encoded the same ESBL genes but did not share the same MLST ST, which may indicate horizontal resistance gene transfer. In summary, the study shows the high prevalence of ESBL-producing E.coli in livestock in Mecklenburg- Western Pomerania and provides the risk of transfer between livestock and farm workers.

Octenidine dihydrochloride (octenidine) was introduced for skin, mucous membrane and wound antisepsis more than 20 years ago. Until now, a wealth of knowledge has been gained, including in vitro and animal studies on efficacy, tolerance, safety and clinical experience both from case reports and prospective controlled trials. Nowadays, octenidine is an established antiseptic in a large field of applications and represents an alternative to older substances such as chlorhexidine, polyvidone-iodine or triclosan. The review is based on the current literature and unpublished original data as well.

Infected wounds are still one of the great challenges in medicine. In the last decade, it has become increasingly clear that antimicrobial chemotherapy is limited by the spread of antimicrobial resistance. Fortunately, new, highly effective antiseptic substances with a broad antimicrobial spectrum are available, so local treatment is expected to get increasingly more important in wound therapy. This paper reviews the antiseptic agent polihexanide (polyhexamethylene biguanide, PHMB), one of the most promising substances available today, from a clinical point of view, focusing on efficacy, safety and clinical applications.

Background: Despite the increasing promotion of alcohol-based hand rubs and the worldwide use of ethanol-based hand rubs in hospitals only few studies have specifically addressed the issue of ethanol absorption when repeatedly applied to human skin. The aim of this study was to assess if ethanol absorption occurs during hygienic and surgical hand disinfection using three different alcohol-based hand-rubs, and to quantify absorption levels in humans. Methods: Twelve volunteers applied three hand-rubs containing 95% (hand-rub A), 85% (hand-rub B) and 55% ethanol (hand-rub C; all w/w). For hygienic hand disinfection, 4 mL were applied 20 times for 30 s, with 1 minute break between applications. For surgical hand disinfection, 20 mL of each hand rub was applied to hands and arms up to the level of the elbow 10 times for 3 minutes, with a break of 5 minutes between applications. Blood concentrations of ethanol and acetaldehyde were determined immediately prior and up to 90 minutes after application using head space gas chromatography. Results: The median of absorbed ethanol after hygienic hand disinfection was 1365 mg (A), 630 mg (B), and 358 mg (C). The proportion of absorbed ethanol was 2.3% (A), 1.1% (B), and 0.9% (C). After surgical hand disinfection, the median of absorbed ethanol was 1067 mg (A), 1542 mg (B), and 477 mg (C). The proportion of absorbed ethanol was 0.7% (A), 1.1% (B), and 0.5% (C). The highest median acetaldehyde concentration after 20 hygienic hand disinfections was 0.57 mg/L (hand-rub C, after 30 min), after 10 surgical hand disinfections 3.99 mg/L (hand-rub A, after 20 minutes). Conclusion: The overall dermal and pulmonary absorption of ethanol was below toxic levels in humans and allows the conclusion that the use of the evaluated ethanol-based hand-rubs is safe.