Chlorhexidine gluconate does not result in epidermal microbiota dysbiosis in healthy adults - 25/05/21
, Aaron C Ericsson, DVM, PhD d, eHighlights |
• | We assessed the CHG exposure impact on the epidermal microbiota. |
• | The microbiota showed no greater change 30 minutes postexposure to CHG. |
• | Single applications of CHG cause minimal, if any, disruption of the epidermal microbiota. |
• | Long-term effects of single applications of CHG on the epidermal microbiota are unlikely. |
Résumé |
Background |
Chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) and other skin antiseptics are ubiquitous in healthcare settings and are routinely used to bathe patients’ skin. The commensal epidermal microbiota is believed to provide colonization resistance and other benefits to the host; yet little is known regarding the long-term stability of the epidermal microbiota, and the impact of CHG bathing. We aimed to assess the influence of CHG exposure to the epidermal microbiota and evaluate the long-term stability of the epidermal microbiota.
Methods |
The epidermal microbiota of 5 individuals was sampled using thorough swabbing of the calf, and characterized via 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing, prior to CHG bathing, and then at 30 minutes, 3 hours, 1 day, 3 days, and 7 days postbathing. Roughly 4 months later, samples were collected from the same 5 individuals, using an identical timeline but with no CHG exposure.
Results |
The epidermal microbiota showed no greater change 30 minutes postexposure to CHG, than was observed in the same individuals during the recovery period, likely representing the normal sample-to-sample variability. Despite that variability, the epidermal microbiota evinced a remarkable degree of intrasubject stability, even over extended periods of time.
Conclusion |
We conclude that single applications of CHG cause minimal, if any, disruption of the epidermal microbiota, and that long-term effects of single applications of CHG on the epidermal microbiota are unlikely.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Key Words : Antiseptic, Healthcare-associated infection, Metagenomics, Microbiome, Skin
Plan
| Conflicts of interest: TLW is a consultant for Medline Industries. |
|
| This study was funded via an investigator-initiated grant from Medline Industries, Deerfield, IL. Medline Industries also provided 2% chlorhexidine gluconate skin antiseptic wipes for the study. The sponsor did not play a role in conduct of the study, data analysis, or manuscript writing/review/decision to submit. |
Vol 49 - N° 6
P. 769-774 - juin 2021 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- Implementation of an external female urinary catheter as an alternative to an indwelling urinary catheter
- Curtis Warren, Jaclyn D. Fosnacht, Elizabeth E. Tremblay
- Implementing daily chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) bathing in VA settings: The human factors engineering to prevent resistant organisms (HERO) project
- Mary Jo Knobloch, Jackson S. Musuuza, Linda McKinley, Michele L. Zimbric, Kelsey Baubie, Ann Schoofs Hundt, Pascale Carayon, Mary Hagle, Christopher D. Pfeiffer, Marinella D. Galea, Christopher J Crnich, Nasia Safdar
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?