COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTS OF ANTISEPTIC AGENTS ON ISOLATES FROM COMPLICATED GUNSHOT WOUNDS (IN VITRO)
 |
Szerzők: Cím: COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTS OF ANTISEPTIC AGENTS ON ISOLATES FROM COMPLICATED GUNSHOT WOUNDS (IN VITRO) DOI: https://doi.org/10.71066/FTTMK.2.22 Megjelent: 2026 |
ABSTRACT
The increasing prevalence of antimicrobial resistance among microorganisms associated with complicated gunshot wounds highlights the need for effective local antiseptic treatment. The aim of this study was to comparatively evaluate the in vitro antimicrobial activity of commonly used antiseptic agents against Gram-positive clinical isolates obtained from complicated gunshot wounds. Clinical isolates of Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Enterococcus faecalis, and Streptococcus pyogenes were examined. The antimicrobial activity of povidone-iodine, decamethoxin, dioxidine, chlorhexidine, Cutasept, and miramistin was evaluated using a serial dilution method at concentrations ranging from 12.5% to 75.0% of the original commercial preparations. The minimum concentration capable of inhibiting microbial growth was determined for each antiseptic–microorganism combination. Considerable differences in susceptibility were observed among both the bacterial species and the antiseptic agents tested. Povidone-iodine demonstrated the highest overall antimicrobial activity, inhibiting most isolates at the lowest concentrations examined. Particularly high susceptibility to povidone-iodine was observed in S. aureus, S. epidermidis, and E. faecalis. Decamethoxin, chlorhexidine, and Cutasept also showed antimicrobial activity, although generally at higher concentrations, whereas dioxidine and miramistin were less effective against some of the tested isolates. The findings demonstrate that the antimicrobial efficacy of antiseptic agents against microorganisms isolated from complicated gunshot wounds is both agent- and species-dependent. Determination of minimum effective concentrations may therefore support the rational selection of topical antiseptic agents and contribute to optimizing the local treatment of infected wounds.
KEYWORDS
antiseptics; complicated gunshot wounds; antimicrobial activity; povidone-iodine; Gram-positive bacteria; antimicrobial resistance
REFERENCES
Abbood, H. M., Hijazi, K., & Gould, I. M. (2023). Chlorhexidine resistance or cross-resistance, that is the question. Antibiotics, 12(5), 798. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12050798
Ali, I., Kon’kova, T., Kasianov, V., Rysev, A., Panglisch, S., Mbianda, X. Y., Habila, M. A., & AlMasoud, N. (2021). Preparation and characterization of nano-structured modified montmorillonite for dioxidine antibacterial drug removal in water. Journal of Molecular Liquids, 331, 115770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2021.115770
Babalska, Z. Ł., Korbecka-Paczkowska, M., & Karpiński, T. M. (2021). Wound antiseptics and European guidelines for antiseptic application in wound treatment. Pharmaceuticals, 14(12), 1253. https://doi.org/10.3390/ph14121253
Bigliardi, P. L., Alsagoff, S. A. L., El-Kafrawi, H. Y., Pyon, J. K., Wa, C. T. C., & Villa, M. A. (2017). Povidone iodine in wound healing: A review of current concepts and practices. International Journal of Surgery, 44, 260–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.06.073
Kolesnyk, O. O., Kryvtsova, M. V., Savenko, M. V., & Urovskyi, O. O. (2024). Ефективність антисептичних препаратів на ізоляти ускладнених вогнестрільних ран в дослідженнях in vitro. Intermedical Journal, (1). https://doi.org/10.32782/2786-7684/2024-1-19
Kuyyakanond, T., & Quesnel, L. B. (1992). The mechanism of action of chlorhexidine. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 100(1–3), 211–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6968.1992.tb14042.x
Lepelletier, D., Maillard, J. Y., Pozzetto, B., & Simon, A. (2020). Povidone iodine: Properties, mechanisms of action, and role in infection control and Staphylococcus aureus decolonization. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, 64(9), e00682-20. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00682-20
Osmanov, A., Farooq, Z., Richardson, M. D., & Denning, D. W. (2020). The antiseptic Miramistin: A review of its comparative in vitro and clinical activity. FEMS Microbiology Reviews, 44(4), 399–417. https://doi.org/10.1093/femsre/fuaa012
Poppolo Deus, F., & Ouanounou, A. (2022). Chlorhexidine in dentistry: Pharmacology, uses, and adverse effects. International Dental Journal, 72(3), 269–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.identj.2022.01.005
Publishing Group “GEOTAR-Media.” (2015). Reference book of medicines: Dioxydin.
Zharkova, M. S., Komlev, A. S., Filatenkova, T. A., Sukhareva, M. S., Vladimirova, E. V., Trulioff, A. S., Orlov, D. S., Dmitriev, A. V., Afinogenova, A. G., Spiridonova, A. A., & Shamova, O. V. (2023). Combined use of antimicrobial peptides with antiseptics against multidrug-resistant bacteria: Pros and cons. Pharmaceutics, 15(1), 291. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics15010291