medigraphic.com
ISSN 2594-1518 (Electronic)
ISSN 1405-0099 (Print)

2011, Number 3

<< Back Next >>

Cir Gen 2011; 33 (3)

Application of 2% lidocaine on subcutaneous cell tissue of clean-contaminated and contaminated surgical wounds to diminish the incidence of infection

Noriega-Salas AL, Sánchez-López-López MÁ, Esperón LGI, Trejo SJ

Language: Spanish
References: 12
Page: 180-184
PDF size: 75.38 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: To demonstrate that the application of 2% lidocaine on the subcutaneous tissue of surgical clean-contaminated and contaminated wounds diminishes the infection risk.
Setting: Hospital General “Xoco”, second level health care hospital.
Design: Non-controlled, simple, randomized clinical assay.
Statistical analysis: Fisher’s exact test, and Student’s t test.
Patients and methods: A simple randomized assignation was used for two groups of patients. One group of 11 patients was applied 10 ml of 2% lidocaine on the subcutaneous tissue of the wound, and the other group of 11 patients received 0.9% saline solution; all 22 patients had clean-contaminated and contaminated surgical wounds. Surgical wounds were checked 7 days after surgery, and the studied variables were age, gender, presence or not of infection on the superficial surgical site.
Results: No infection was observed in the 11 patients in whom 2% lidocain had been applied, whereas 3 patients from the 0.9% saline solution group presented infection of the surgical wound, with a statistically significant difference of P ‹ 0.05 between both groups.
Conclusion: A statistically significant diminution was observed in the frequency of infection at the surgical clean-contaminated and contaminated wounds when applying 2% lidocaine, as compared to not applying it.


REFERENCES

  1. Sawyer RG, Preutt TL. Wound infections. Surg Clin North Am 1994; 74: 519-536.

  2. Catterall W, Mackie W. Anestésicos locales. Cap. 15 En: Joel Griffith Hardman, Lee E. Limbird, Alfred G. Gilman (eds) Goodman y Gilman. Bases farmacológicas de la terapéutica médica. 9ª edición. México, D.F., Editorial Interamericana McGraw-Hill, 2001: 353-72.

  3. Schmidt RM, Rosenkranz HS. Antimicrobial activity of local anesthetics, lidocaine and procaine. J Infect Dis 1970; 121: 597-607.

  4. Giddon DB, Lindhe J. In vivo quantitation of local anesthetic suppression of leucocyte adherence. Am J. Pathol 1972; 68: 327-338.

  5. Rabinovitch M, DeStefano MJ. Cell shape changes induced by cationic anesthetics. J Exp Med 1976; 143: 290-304.

  6. Cullen BF, Haschkel RH. Local anesthetic inhibition of phagocytosis and metabolism of human leukocytes. Anesthesiology 1974; 40: 142-146.

  7. Feinstein MG, Fieckers J, Fraser C. An analysis of the mechanism of local anesthesic inhibition of platelet aggregation and secretion. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1976; 197: 215-228.

  8. Schiffer CA, Sanel FT, Young VB, Aisner J. Reversal of granulocyte adherence to nylon fibers using local anesthesic agents: possible application to filtration leukapheresis. Blood 1977; 50: 213-225.

  9. MacGregor RR, Thorner RE, Wright DM. Lidocaine inhibits granulocyte adherence and prevents granulocyte delivery to inflammatory sites. Blood 1980; 56: 203-209.

  10. Rosenberg PH, Renkonen OV. Antimicrobial activity of bupivacaine and morphine. Anestesiology 1985; 62: 178-179.

  11. Eriksson AS, Sinclair R, Cassuto J, Thompsen P. Influence of lidocaine on leucocyte function in the surgical wound. Anesthesiology 1992; 77: 74-78.

  12. Aritzi GP. Aplicación de lidocaína en el tejido celular subcutáneo para la prevención de infección de la herida quirúrgica en un modelo experimental. Cir Gen 1999; 19(2): 120-123.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com