Background: Although several meta-analyses reported the impact of chlorhexidine (CHX) use in patients undergoing various types of surgery, no meta-analysis summarized the overall effectiveness of CHX specifically for cardiac surgery. This meta-analysis aimed to examine the impact of CHX on infections after cardiac surgery compared with other cleansers or antiseptics.
Methods: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception up to October 2020 for potentially eligible studies: (1) population: patients who underwent cardiac surgery; (2) intervention or exposure: any type of CHX use in the treatment or exposed group; (3) outcome: number of patients with infections; (4) comparison: placebo or other antiseptic agents; (5) English. The primary outcome was surgical site infection (SSI).
Results: Fourteen studies were included, with 8235 and 6901 patients in the CHX and control groups. CHX was not protective against SSI (OR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.57-1.04, P = 0.090). CHX was protective for superficial wound infection (OR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.26-0.70, P = 0.001), but not with deep wound infection (P = 0.509). CHX was not protective against urinary tract of infection (P = 0.415) but was protective for bloodstream infection (OR = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.16-0.80, P = 0.012), nosocomial infections (OR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.44-0.69, P < 0.001), and pneumonia (OR = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.11-0.61, P = 0.002).
Conclusions: In patients undergoing cardiac surgery, CHX does not protect against SSI, deep wound infection, and urinary tract infections but might protect against superficial SSI, bloodstream infection, nosocomial infections, and pneumonia.
Keywords: Antiseptics; Cardiac surgery; Chlorhexidine; Meta-analysis; Surgical complications; Wound infection.
© 2021. The Author(s).