CClinicalTrials.gg
TerminatedNCT01577524Updated Jul 14, 2016

The Use of Diluted Povidone Iodine Irrigation in Spine Surgery

A Phase 2 interventional study of Povidone-Iodine and Saline in Surgical Site Infection, sponsored by Attabib, Najmedden, M.D.. Terminated at 1 site in Canada. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 75 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2016-07-14.

Sponsored by Attabib, Najmedden, M.D. · Phase 2, Interventional, and Prevention

Why this study was terminated
We had very low recruitment rates that would have resulted in several years being added to the study to achieve an appropriate sample size.
Phase
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
58
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 75 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The purpose of the study is to determine whether diluted Povidone Iodine solution used to irrigate surgical wounds during spine surgery decreases the incidence of surgical site infections.

Read the detailed description

Post-operative infections in spine surgery have been extensively investigated in the literature. These investigations focus on the efficacy of using peri-operative antibiotics, Povidone Iodine skin preparations, the effects of shaving around the surgical sit, and the use of intra-operative diluted Povidone Iodine wound irrigation in preventing post-operative infections.

Povidone-iodine is a complex of polyvinyl pyrrolidine and tri-iodine ions widely used as an antiseptic agent. It has bactericidal activity against a wide spectrum of pathogens, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). The safety of its use intra-operatively has been evaluated in animal studies and also supported through Randomized Controlled Trials in spinal surgery and in other surgical subspecialties.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of the intra-operative use of diluted Povidone Iodine solution in reducing post-operative infections when used for irrigating surgical incisions during spinal surgery compared with 0.9% Sodium Chloride Irrigation Solution (i.e. normal saline solution).

The primary outcome measure will be seen as a reduction in the number of post-operative infections. As a result and although not directly measured, it is suspected that a reduction in post-operative infections may result in quicker healing with fewer complications and pain.

02

Conditions studied

  • Surgical Site Infection
03

In context

Surgical Wound Infection

670 studies on the registry are indexed under Surgical Wound Infection; 141 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 58 is below the median of 200 across 514 interventional studies indexed under Surgical Wound Infection.

Browse Surgical Wound Infection studies →

Lead sponsor

This is the only study on the registry with Attabib, Najmedden, M.D. as lead sponsor.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 75 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Age of 18-75
  • Undergoing posterior surgical spinal procedure for degenerative spine disease, extra-dural tumors, trauma, or spinal deformity
  • No obvious potential infective focus
  • Patient willing to enroll

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Age \<18 or >75
  • Identified infective focus in the body, including furuncles,or acne at surgical incision site
  • Patient with discitis or spinal osteomyelitis
  • Dural tear
  • Potential use of Bone Morphogenic Protein (BMP)
  • Iodine hypersensitivity
  • Out of province patients due to difficulty in arranging follow up visits
  • Minimal invasive spine surgical procedure (MISS) due to difficulty of having diluted Betadine solution contact soft tissue with the use if MISS retractors
  • Pregnancy
  • Inability to provide informed consent
05

Study design

Phase
Phase 2
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Participant)
Enrollment
58 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Diluted Povidone Iodine Solution

    Drug: Povidone-Iodine

  • Placebo comparator
    Normal Saline Wash

    Drug: Saline

Interventions

  • DrugPovidone-Iodine

    Subjects in the treatment group will receive 3.5% diluted Povidone Iodine solution in the surgical incision in a quantity sufficient to fill the wound to the level of the skin. The Povidone Iodine solution will be maintained in the incision for 3 minutes, after which it will be flushed from the wound with normal saline solution.

    Also known as: Betadine

  • DrugSaline

    Subjects in the Placebo Comparator group will receive normal saline solution in a quantity sufficient to fill the wound to the level of the skin. The saline solution will be maintained in the incision for 3 minutes, after which it will be flushed from the wound with additional saline solution to replicate the saline wash procedure followed in the Treatment group.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Number of post-operative infections diagnosed in both treatment and control groups

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC)definition of surgical site infections (SSI)will be used for this study.This definition addresses both superficial and deep surgical site infections. Outcome will be determined by the number of superficial, deep, and total (superficial plus deep) wound infections for each group.

    Time frame: Twelve months post operation

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Saint John Regional Hospital
    Saint John, New Brunswick E2L 4L2, Canada
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Celik SE, Kara A. Does shaving the incision site increase the infection rate after spinal surgery? Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007 Jul 1;32(15):1575-7. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318074c39f. PubMed 17621202 ↗
  • Cheng MT, Chang MC, Wang ST, Yu WK, Liu CL, Chen TH. Efficacy of dilute betadine solution irrigation in the prevention of postoperative infection of spinal surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005 Aug 1;30(15):1689-93. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000171907.60775.85. PubMed 16094267 ↗
  • Georgiade G, Riefkohl R, Georgiade N, Georgiade R, Wildman MF. Efficacy of povidone-iodine in pre-operative skin preparation. J Hosp Infect. 1985 Mar;6 Suppl A:67-71. doi: 10.1016/s0195-6701(85)80048-7. PubMed 2860178 ↗
  • Goldenheim PD. In vitro efficacy of povidone-iodine solution and cream against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Postgrad Med J. 1993;69 Suppl 3:S62-5. PubMed 8290460 ↗
  • Horan TC, Gaynes RP, Martone WJ, Jarvis WR, Emori TG. CDC definitions of nosocomial surgical site infections, 1992: a modification of CDC definitions of surgical wound infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1992 Oct;13(10):606-8. No abstract available. PubMed 1334988 ↗
  • Rubinstein E, Findler G, Amit P, Shaked I. Perioperative prophylactic cephazolin in spinal surgery. A double-blind placebo-controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1994 Jan;76(1):99-102. PubMed 8300691 ↗
  • Schubert R. Disinfectant properties of new povidone-iodine preparations. J Hosp Infect. 1985 Mar;6 Suppl A:33-6. doi: 10.1016/s0195-6701(85)80043-8. PubMed 2860173 ↗
  • Sindelar WF, Brower ST, Merkel AB, Takesue EI. Randomised trial of intraperitoneal irrigation with low molecular weight povidone-iodine solution to reduce intra-abdominal infectious complications. J Hosp Infect. 1985 Mar;6 Suppl A:103-14. doi: 10.1016/s0195-6701(85)80054-2. PubMed 2860153 ↗
  • Strohecker J, Piotrowski WP, Lametschwandtner A. The intra-operative application of povidone-iodine in neurosurgery. J Hosp Infect. 1985 Mar;6 Suppl A:123-5. doi: 10.1016/s0195-6701(85)80057-8. PubMed 2860156 ↗
  • Wilson AP, Treasure T, Sturridge MF, Gruneberg RN. A scoring method (ASEPSIS) for postoperative wound infections for use in clinical trials of antibiotic prophylaxis. Lancet. 1986 Feb 8;1(8476):311-3. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90838-x. PubMed 2868173 ↗
  • Fang A, Hu SS, Endres N, Bradford DS. Risk factors for infection after spinal surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005 Jun 15;30(12):1460-5. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000166532.58227.4f. PubMed 15959380 ↗
  • Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(5):373-83. doi: 10.1016/0021-9681(87)90171-8. PubMed 3558716 ↗
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jul 14, 2016, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT01577524
Lead sponsor
Attabib, Najmedden, M.D.
Responsible party
Dr. Najmedden Attabib (Principle Investigator, Attabib, Najmedden, M.D.) — Principal investigator
First posted
Apr 16, 2012
Start date
Jan 2012
Primary completion
Jun 2016
Completion
Jun 2016
Last update
Jul 14, 2016

Study contacts

Najmedden Attabib, MD
principal investigator · Neurosurgery Department, Saint John Regional Hospital

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is terminated, as verified in Jul 2016. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion