Why do they put Betadine before surgery?

After Betadine skin preparation, the needle is inserted parallel to the skin through the radial collateral ligament and to a depth of approximately ¾ to 1 inch into the synovial cavity, aspirating while advancing.

From: The Sports Medicine Resource Manual, 2008

View PDF

Volume 44, August 2017, Pages 260-268

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.06.073Get rights and content

Of the many antimicrobial agents available, iodophore-based formulations such as povidone iodine have remained popular after decades of use for antisepsis and wound healing applications due to their favorable efficacy and tolerability. Povidone iodine's broad spectrum of activity, ability to penetrate biofilms, lack of associated resistance, anti-inflammatory properties, low cytotoxicity and good tolerability have been cited as important factors, and no negative effect on wound healing has been observed in clinical practice. Over the past few decades, numerous reports on the use of povidone iodine have been published, however, many of these studies are of differing design, endpoints, and quality. More recent data clearly supports its use in wound healing.

Based on data collected through PubMed using specified search criteria based on above topics and clinical experience of the authors, this article will review preclinical and clinical safety and efficacy data on the use of povidone iodine in wound healing and its implications for the control of infection and inflammation, together with the authors' advice for the successful treatment of acute and chronic wounds.

Povidone iodine has many characteristics that position it extraordinarily well for wound healing, including its broad antimicrobial spectrum, lack of resistance, efficacy against biofilms, good tolerability and its effect on excessive inflammation. Due to its rapid, potent, broad-spectrum antimicrobial properties, and favorable risk/benefit profile, povidone iodine is expected to remain a highly effective treatment for acute and chronic wounds in the foreseeable future.

1. Abbey DM, Turner DM, Warson JS, Wirt TC, Scalley RD. Treatment of postoperative wound infections following spinal fusion with instrumentation. J Spinal Disord. 1995;8:278–283. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

2. Charehbili A, Swijnenburg RJ, van de Velde C, van den Bremer J, van Gijn W. A retrospective analysis of surgical site infections after chlorhexidine-alcohol versus iodine-alcohol for pre-operative antisepsis. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2014;15:310–313. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

3. Darouiche RO, Wall MJ, Jr, Itani KM, et al. Chlorhexidine-alcohol versus povidone-iodine for surgical-site antisepsis. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:18–26. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

4. Glassman SD, Dimar JR, Puno RM, Johnson JR. Salvage of instrumental lumbar fusions complicated by surgical wound infection. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1996;21:2163–2169. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

5. Guzel A, Ozekinci T, Ozkan U, Celik Y, Ceviz A, Belen D. Evaluation of the skin flora after chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine preparation in neurosurgical practice. Surg Neurol. 2009;71:207–210. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

6. Hakkarainen TW, Dellinger EP, Evans HL, et al. Comparative effectiveness of skin antiseptic agents in reducing surgical site infections: a report from the Washington State Surgical Care and Outcomes Assessment Program. J Am Coll Surg. 2014;218:336–344. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

7. Hemani ML, Lepor H. Skin preparation for the prevention of surgical site infection: which agent is best? Rev Urol. 2009;11:190–195. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

8. Jarral OA, McCormack DJ, Ibrahim S, Shipolini AR. Should surgeons scrub with chlorhexidine or iodine prior to surgery? Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2011;12:1017–1021. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

9. Keller RB, Pappas AM. Infection after spinal fusion using internal fixation instrumentation. Orthop Clin North Am. 1972;3:99–111. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

10. Kostuik JP, Israel J, Hall JE. Scoliosis surgery in adults. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1973;(93):225–234. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

11. Lonstein J, Winter R, Moe J, Gaines D. Wound infection with Harrington instrumentation and spine fusion for scoliosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1973;(96):222–233. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

12. Mears SC, Dinah AF, Knight TA, Frassica FJ, Belkoff SM. Visibility of surgical site marking after preoperative skin preparation. Eplasty. 2008;8:e35. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

13. Moen MD, Noone MB, Kirson I. Povidone-iodine spray technique versus traditional scrub-paint technique for preoperative abdominal wall preparation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;187:1434–1436. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

14. Mok JM, Guillaume TJ, Talu U, et al. Clinical outcome of deep wound infection after instrumented posterior spinal fusion: a matched cohort analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009;34:578–583. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

15. Olsen MA, Mayfield J, Lauryssen C, et al. Risk factors for surgical site infection in spinal surgery. J Neurosurg. 2003;98:149–155. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

16. Pull ter Gunne AF, Mohamed AS, Skolasky RL, van Laarhoven CJ, Cohen DB. The presentation, incidence, etiology, and treatment of surgical site infections after spinal surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010;35:1323–1328. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

17. Roberts FJ, Walsh A, Wing P, Dvorak M, Schweigel J. The influence of surveillance methods on surgical wound infection rates in a tertiary care spinal surgery service. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1998;23:366–370. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

18. West JL, 3rd, Ogilvie JW, Bradford DS. Complications of the variable screw plate pedicle screw fixation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1991;16:576–579. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]