1887
  1. Home
  2. Publications
  3. Journal of Medical Microbiology
  4. Volume 67, Issue 12
  5. Article

oa Evaluation of fast-acting bactericidal activity and substantivity of an antiseptic agent, olanexidine gluconate, using an ex vivo skin model

HTML
59.56 Kb
PDF
1.73 MB
  • Received:
  • Accepted:
  • Cover date:
Preview this:
Free Preview thumbnail Magnify
Zoom in
Zoomout

Evaluation of fast-acting bactericidal activity and substantivity of an antiseptic agent, olanexidine gluconate, using an ex vivo skin model, Page 1 of 1

| /docserver/preview/fulltext/jmm/67/12/1796_jmm000870-1.gif

  • Purpose. We assessed the fast-acting bactericidal activity and substantivity of olanexidine gluconate (OLG) to investigate its remaining bactericidal activity on the skin after rinsing and drying by using an ex vivo Yucatan micropig (YMP) skin model.

    Methodology. The fast-acting bactericidal activity was evaluated in pigskin models inoculated with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), Staphylococcus epidermidis, vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecalis (VRE), Acinetobacter baumannii, Corynebacterium minutissimum and Cutibacterium acnes. To evaluate substantivity, the YMP skin piece first had 1.5 % OLG, chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) formulations or 10 % povidone–iodine (PVP-I) applied to it, and was then rinsed with distilled water, incubated for 4, 6, 8 or 12 h and inoculated with the test bacteria (MRSA, S. epidermidis and VRE). The viable bacteria remaining at 1 min of exposure of bacteria were counted to measure the quantity of antiseptic molecules retaining bactericidal activity. To determine the factors contributing to the substantivity, the stratum corneum (SC) of the YMP skin that had had OLG or CHG applied to it was exfoliated using a tape-stripping method and the amount of antiseptic was quantitated.

    Results. OLG showed a fast-acting bactericidal activity that was similar to or stronger than that of CHG formulations up to a concentration of 1 % and PVP-I with a short exposure time of 30 s, and substantivity until 12 h after rinsing, whereas the other antiseptics hardly showed any substantivity. There was 2.8 times or more OLG in the SC than CHG.

    Conclusion. OLG has fast-acting activity and substantivity, which are required properties for an antiseptic, and is useful for preventing infections.

© 2018 The Authors | Published by the Microbiology Society

  • 1. Hagi A, Iwata K, Nii T, Nakata H, Tsubotani Y et al. Bactericidal effects and mechanism of action of olanexidine gluconate, a new antiseptic. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2015;59:4551–4559 [CrossRef][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Inoue Y, Hagi A, Nii T, Tsubotani Y, Nakata H et al. Novel antiseptic compound OPB-2045G shows potent bactericidal activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus both in vitro and in vivo: a pilot study in animals. J Med Microbiol 2015;64:32–36 [CrossRef][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Flick AC, Ding HX, Leverett CA, Kyne RE, Liu KK et al. Synthetic Approaches to the New Drugs Approved During 2015. J Med Chem 2017;60:6480–6515 [CrossRef][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Rosenberg A, Alatary SD, Peterson AF. Safety and efficacy of the antiseptic chlorhexidine gluconate. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1976;143:789–792[PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Pereira LJ, Lee GM, Wade KJ. An evaluation of five protocols for surgical handwashing in relation to skin condition and microbial counts. J Hosp Infect 1997;36:49–65 [CrossRef][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Aly R, Maibach HI. Comparative study on the antimicrobial effect of 0.5% chlorhexidine gluconate and 70% isopropyl alcohol on the normal flora of hands. Appl Environ Microbiol 1979;37:610–613[PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Lowbury EJ, Lilly HA, Ayliffe GA. Preoperative disinfection of surgeons' hands: use of alcoholic solutions and effects of gloves on skin flora. Br Med J 1974;4:369–372 [CrossRef][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Hibbard JS. Analyses comparing the antimicrobial activity and safety of current antiseptic agents: a review. J Infus Nurs 2005;28:194–207 [CrossRef][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Rubinchik E, Pasetka C. Ex vivo skin infection model. Methods Mol Biol 2010;618:359–369 [CrossRef][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Herruzo-Cabrera R, García-Caballero J, Fernandez-Aceñero MJ. A new alcohol solution (N-duopropenide) for hygienic (or routine) hand disinfection is more useful than classic handwashing: in vitro and in vivo studies in burn and other intensive care units. Burns 2001;27:747–752 [CrossRef][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Bush LW, Benson LM, White JH. Pig skin as test substrate for evaluating topical antimicrobial activity. J Clin Microbiol 1986;24:343–348[PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Gaonkar TA, Geraldo I, Caraos L, Modak SM. An alcohol hand rub containing a synergistic combination of an emollient and preservatives: prolonged activity against transient pathogens. J Hosp Infect 2005;59:12–18 [CrossRef][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Lavker RM, Dong G, Zheng PS, Murphy GF. Hairless micropig skin. A novel model for studies of cutaneous biology. Am J Pathol 1991;138:687–697[PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Fujii M, Yamanouchi S, Hori N, Iwanaga N, Kawaguchi N et al. Evaluation of Yucatan micropig skin for use as an in vitro model for skin permeation study. Biol Pharm Bull 1997;20:249–254 [CrossRef][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Takeuchi H, Terasaka S, Sakurai T, Furuya A, Urano H et al. Variation assessment for in vitro permeabilities through Yucatan micropig skin. Biol Pharm Bull 2011;34:555–561 [CrossRef][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 16. World Health Organization WHO Guidelines on hand hygiene in health care: first global patient safety challenge clean care is safer care Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2009
     [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Boyce JM, Pittet D.Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory CommitteeHICPAC/SHEA/APIC/IDSA Hand Hygiene Task Force Guideline for hand hygiene in health-care settings: recommendations of the healthcare infection control practices advisory committee and the HICPAC/SHEA/APIC/IDSA hand hygiene task force. Am J Infect Control 2002;30:S1–S46[PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Beausoleil CM. A guide for validation of neutralizer systems used in topical antimicrobial efficacy evaluations. In Paulson DS. (editor) In Handbook of Topical Antimicrobials New York, NY: Marcel Dekker; 2003; pp.365–376
     [Google Scholar]
  • 19. ASTM International Destination E1054-08 Standard test methods for evaluation of inactivators of antimicrobial agents. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA 2013
     [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Dreher F, Arens A, Hostýnek JJ, Mudumba S, Ademola J et al. Colorimetric method for quantifying human Stratum corneum removed by adhesive-tape stripping. Acta Derm Venereol 1998;78:186–189 [CrossRef][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Owens CD, Stoessel K. Surgical site infections: epidemiology, microbiology and prevention. J Hosp Infect 2008;70 Suppl 2:3–10 [CrossRef][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Bowler PG, Duerden BI, Armstrong DG. Wound microbiology and associated approaches to wound management. Clin Microbiol Rev 2001;14:244–269 [CrossRef][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Karpanen TJ, Worthington T, Conway BR, Hilton AC, Elliott TS et al. Penetration of chlorhexidine into human skin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2008;52:3633–3636 [CrossRef][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Nakata H, Tsubotani Y, Nii T, Hagi A, Inoue Y et al. Effects of olanexidine gluconate on preoperative skin preparation: an experimental study in cynomolgus monkeys. J Med Microbiol 2017;66:678–685 [CrossRef][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Lowbury EJ, Lilly HA. The effect of blood on disinfection of surgeons' hands. Br J Surg 1974;61:19–21 [CrossRef][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Larson E. Guideline for use of topical antimicrobial agents. Am J Infect Control 1988;16:253–266 [CrossRef][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Harihara Y, Ito M, Oe M, Katayama M. A phase III clinical study of novel antiseptic, OPB-2045G solution (Olanedine Antiseptic solution 1.5%). J Jpn Soc Surg Infect 2015;12:137–148
     [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Nagai H, Fukuda H. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by Olanedine(R) (olanexidine gluconate), a new antiseptic. Contact Dermatitis 2018;78:164–165 [CrossRef][PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
http://sgm.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000870
Loading

Supplementary Data

 Data loading....

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000870
2018-11-07
2019-02-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmm/67/12/1796.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000870&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Author and Article Information

 Figure data loading....

Footnotes:

Validated antibodies in this article

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Please check the format of the address you have entered.
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error