In a randomized clinical study, 61 hospitalized men were examined to test the local tolerability and antimicrobial efficacy of antiseptic treatment of the genitals with povidone iodine versus octenidine hydrochloride solution. Antibacterial efficacy was established by comparing the total aerobic bacterial colony count from standardized swabs from the orificium urethrae externum before, immediately after, and 30 and 60 min after antisepsis. Tolerability was assessed by dermatoscopy, applying a scale to rate the criteria of reddening, erosions and microbleeding. pH-value was taken and the nitracin yellow test carried out at several intervals. Patients assessed sensations (itching, burning, warmth, cold tension) in visual analogue scales. The test for equivalence in efficacy of both antiseptic agents produced no significant result (P = 0.3). The sum score of tolerability produced a better result for povidone iodine. In addition, the drop in the pH value after observed antisepsis with povidone iodine provides an additional protective mechanism against bacterial colonization.

Administration, Cutaneous↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Automated RNA selection.

In vitro selection can be used to generate nucleic acid ligands (aptamers) to target molecules ranging in size and structure from cations to cells. However, the selection process is repetitive and time-consuming. We have automated a protocol for in vitro selection using an augmented Beckman Biomek 2000 pipetting robot. The automated selection procedure requires the integration of four devices and the optimization of four molecular biology methods, and is one of the most complex automated protocols attempted to date. Initial attempts at selection yielded robust replication parasites, but optimization of the automated selection procedure suppressed the emergence of these parasites and led to the selection of true nucleic acid ligands. Automated selection can now be used to generate nucleic acid aptamers in days rather than weeks or months.

Base Composition↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Influence of the antiseptic agents polyhexanide and octenidine on FL cells and on healing of experimental superficial aseptic wounds in piglets. A double-blind, randomised, stratified, controlled, parallel-group study.

The main target of the combination of octenidine with phenoxyethanol (Octenisept) is the antisepsis of acute wounds, whereas polyhexanide combined with polyethylene glycol in Ringer solution (Lavasept) is the agent of choice for antisepsis of chronic wounds and burns. Because comparative data for both agents on the effects on wound healing are lacking, we investigated the influence of preparations based on polyhexanide and octenidine versus placebo (Ringer solution) in experimental superficial aseptic skin wounds (n = 108) of 20 mm diameter, using a double-blind, randomised, stratified, controlled, parallel-group design in piglets. Computerised planimetry and histopathological methods were used for the assessment of wound healing. Histologically, no significant differences could be verified at any time between the 3 groups. However, in the early phase (day 9 after wounding), the octenidine-based product retarded wound contraction to a significantly greater extent than placebo and polyhexanide, whereas in the later phase (days 18 and 28), polyhexanide promoted contraction significantly more than did placebo and octenidine. The consequence is complete wound closure after 22.9 days using polyhexanide, in comparison to the placebo after 24.1 days (p < 0.05) and octenidine after 28.3 days (no statistical difference to placebo). This may be explained by the better tolerance of polyhexanide in vitro, which was demonstrated with dose and time dependence in cytotoxicity tests on human amnion cells.

Animals↗