Back to Basics: Could the Preoperative Skin Antiseptic Agent Help Prevent Biofilm-Related Capsular Contracture?

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundCapsular contracture (CC) has remained an unresolved issue throughout history. Strong evidence focuses on bacterial biofilm as its main source. A literature review revealed that more than 90% of bacteria found in capsules and implants removed from patients with Baker grade III-IV CC belong to the resident skin microbiome (Staphylococcus epidermidis, predominant microorganism). The use of an adequate preoperative skin antiseptic may be a critical step to minimize implant contamination and help prevent biofilm-related CC.ObjectivesThe authors sought to compare the effect of 2 different antiseptic skin preparations: povidone-iodine (PVP-I) vs chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) on CC proportions after primary breast augmentation through a periareolar approach.MethodsIn June of 2014, The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America proposed to use CHG for preoperative skin preparation in the absence of alcohol-containing antiseptic agents as strategy to prevent surgical site infection. The clinical safety committee of a surgical center in Colombia decided to change PVP-I to CHG for surgical site preparation thereafter. The medical records of 63 patients who underwent to primary breast augmentation through a periareolar approach during 2014 were reviewed. In the first 6 months PVP-I was used in 32 patients, and later CHG was employed in 31 patients.ResultsPearson’s chi-squared test to compare CC proportions between subgroups showed a statistically significant difference. The CC proportion was higher for patients who had antisepsis with PVP-I. CC was absent when CHG was employed.ConclusionsCHG as preoperative skin antiseptic for primary breast augmentation surgery was more effective than PVP-I to help prevent biofilm-related CC.Level of Evidence: 3