Should oral chlorhexidine remain in ventilator-associated pneumonia prevention bundles?

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is related with high mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation and costs. Recent studies have questioned the safety and effectiveness of oral chlorhexidine to prevent VAP. We sought to verify whether the adverse effects of this substance outweigh its benefits. We searched several databases and selected studies that investigated the use of oral chlorhexidine and its impact on mortality. No association between oral chlorhexidine and lower VAP rates was found on meta-analyses of double-blind randomized trials, however significant increase in mortality was reported. It is speculated that chlorhexidine can cause damage to several organic sectors and cytotoxicity. Although it still can be beneficial in specific settings, robust evidence to recommend its routine application for all mechanically ventilated patients is lacking; therefore, given the possibility of harm, it would be better to follow the principle of non-maleficence until more studies becomes available.

Should oral chlorhexidine remain in ventilator-associated pneumonia prevention bundles? / ¿Debe permanecer la clorhexidina oral en los paquetes de prevención de la neumonía asociada al respirador?

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is related with high mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation and costs. Recent studies have questioned the safety and effectiveness of oral chlorhexidine to prevent VAP. We sought to verify whether the adverse effects of this substance outweigh its benefits. We searched several databases and selected studies that investigated the use of oral chlorhexidine and its impact on mortality. No association between oral chlorhexidine and lower VAP rates was found on meta-analyses of double-blind randomized trials, however significant increase in mortality was reported. It is speculated that chlorhexidine can cause damage to several organic sectors and cytotoxicity. Although it still can be beneficial in specific settings, robust evidence to recommend its routine application for all mechanically ventilated patients is lacking; therefore, given the possibility of harm, it would be better to follow the principle of non-maleficence until more studies becomes available (AU)

La neumonía asociada al respirador (VAP) está relacionada con una elevada mortalidad, mayor duración de la ventilación mecánica y costes elevados. Estudios recientes han cuestionado la seguridad y la eficacia de la clorhexidina oral para prevenir la VAP. Hemos intentado verificar si los efectos adversos de esta sustancia superan sus beneficios. Se realizaron búsquedas en diversas bases de datos y se seleccionaron estudios que habían investigado el uso de la clorhexidina oral y su impacto sobre la mortalidad. En los metaanálisis de los ensayos aleatorizados a doble ciego no se encontró ninguna asociación entre clorhexidina oral y tasas de VAP más bajas; sin embargo, sí se informó de un aumento significativo de la mortalidad. Se especula que la clorhexidina puede causar daño a varias partes del organismo y citotoxicidad. Pese a que todavía podría ser beneficiosa en entornos específicos, no se dispone de evidencias sólidas para recomendar su aplicación rutinaria para todos los pacientes sometidos a ventilación mecánica; por lo tanto, dada la posibilidad de ocasionar daños, sería mejor seguir el principio de no maleficencia hasta que se disponga de más estudios (AU)

Should oral chlorhexidine remain in ventilator-associated pneumonia prevention bundles?

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is related with high mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation and costs. Recent studies have questioned the safety and effectiveness of oral chlorhexidine to prevent VAP. We sought to verify whether the adverse effects of this substance outweigh its benefits. We searched several databases and selected studies that investigated the use of oral chlorhexidine and its impact on mortality. No association between oral chlorhexidine and lower VAP rates was found on meta-analyses of double-blind randomized trials, however significant increase in mortality was reported. It is speculated that chlorhexidine can cause damage to several organic sectors and cytotoxicity. Although it still can be beneficial in specific settings, robust evidence to recommend its routine application for all mechanically ventilated patients is lacking; therefore, given the possibility of harm, it would be better to follow the principle of non-maleficence until more studies becomes available.

Utilidad del Oleozón® tópico en las úlceras orales del paciente con ventilación artificial mecánica, Guantánamo 2018 / Utilidade do Oleozón® tópico nas úlceras orais do paciente com ventilação artificial mecânica, Guantanamo 2018 / Usefulness of topical Oleozón® in the oral ulcers of the patient with mechanical artificial ventilation, Guantanamo 2018

Introducción: Las úlceras de la mucosa oral son comunes en los pacientes con ventilación artificial mecánica. Objetivo: Determinar la utilidad del Oleozón® tópico en el tratamiento de las úlceras de la mu cosa oral en pacientes tratados con ventilación artificial mecánica en la Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos (UCI) del Hospital General Docente Dr Agostinho Neto. Método: Se realizó un estudio tipo caso-control durante enero-julio de 2018. El universo lo conformaron 70 pacientes, de los que se seleccionó una muestra aleatoria y se agruparon en un grupo control (n=20) que se les realizó limpieza de la cavidad bucal con solución salina fisiológica 0,9 por ciento y un grupo estudio (n=20) que se les realizó cura de la úlcera con Oleozón® tópico. Se analizó la localización, área, forma de presentación y magnitud de la úlcera y la evolución clínica de acuerdo al tratamiento que se aplicó. Resultados: La evolución satisfactoria de este tipo de úlcera se precisó en el 40,0 por ciento de los pacientes que conformaron el grupo control y el 90,0 por ciento de los que integraron el grupo estudio (p < 0,01). En este último grupo la ventana entre el inicio del tratamiento y control de la úlcera oral fue de 4,5 ± 1,1 días y para el primero fue 8,1 ± 2,7 días (p < 0,01). Conclusión: Se revela la conveniencia de la aplicación de Oleozón® tópico al tratamiento de las úlceras de la mucosa oral que se presentan en los pacientes tratados con ventilación artificial mecánica(AU)

Introduction: Ulcers of the oral mucosa are common in patients with mechanical artificial ventilation. Objective: To determine the usefulness of topical Oleozón® in the treatment of oral mucosal ulcers in patients treated with mechanical artificial ventilation in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of the General Teaching Hospital "Dr. Agostinho Neto". Method: A case-control study was carried out during January-July 2018. The universe was made up of 70 patients, from which a random sample was selected and grouped in a control group (n=20) who were cleaned the oral cavity with 0.9per cent physiological saline solution and a study group (n=20) who were cured of the ulcer with topical Oleozón®. The location, area, form of presentation and magnitude of the ulcer and the clinical evolution were analyzed according to the treatment that was applied. Results: The satisfactory evolution of this type of ulcer was required in 40.0por cento of the patients that formed the control group and 90.0per cent of those who made up the study group (p<0.01). In this last group, the window between the start of treatment and control of the oral ulcer was 4.5 ± 1.1 days and for the first one it was 8.1 ± 2.7 days (p<0.01). Conclusion: The convenience of the application of topical Oleozón® to the treatment of oral mucosal ulcers that occur in patients treated with mechanical artificial ventilation is revealed(AU)

Introdução: Úlceras da mucosa oral são comuns em pacientes com ventilação artificial mecânica. Objetivo: Determinar a utilidade do Oleozón® tópico no tratamento de úlceras na mucosa oral em pacientes tratados com ventilação artificial mecânica na Unidade de Terapia Intensiva (UTI) do Hospital Geral de Ensino "Dr. Agostinho Neto". Método: Foi realizado um estudo de caso-controle no período de janeiro a julho de 2018. O universo foi constituído por 70 pacientes, dos quais uma amostra aleatória foi selecionada e agrupada em um grupo controle (n=20) que foi limpo de cavidade oral com solução salina fisiológica a 0,9por cento e um grupo de estudo (n=20) curado da úlcera com Oleozón® tópico. A localização, área, forma de apresentação e magnitude da úlcera e a evolução clínica foram analisadas de acordo com o tratamento aplicado. Resultados: A evolução satisfatória desse tipo de úlcera foi necessária em 40,0por cento dos pacientes que formaram o grupo controle e em 90,0por cento daqueles que fizeram parte do grupo de estudo (p<0,01). Neste último grupo, a janela entre o início do tratamento e o controle da úlcera oral foi de 4,5 ± 1,1 dias e no primeiro foi de 8,1 ± 2,7 dias (p<0,01). Conclusão: É revelada a conveniência da aplicação tópica de Oleozón® no tratamento de úlceras na mucosa bucal que ocorrem em pacientes tratados com ventilação artificial mecânica(AU)