Clinical use of 0.1% polyhexanide and propylbetaine on acute and hard-to-heal wounds: a literature review

OBJECTIVE

To summarise the findings on the effect of the clinical use of 0.1% polyhexanide-propylbetaine (PHMB/betaine) solution/gel on acute and hard-to-heal (chronic) wound healing.

METHOD

A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus and the CENTRAL Trials Registry of the Cochrane Collaboration. Paired reviewers conducted title and abstract screening and full-text screening to identify experimental, quasi-experimental and observational studies. Study quality and risk of bias were not formally evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 17 studies met the eligibility criteria. The findings from 12 studies indicated that the use of 0.1% PHMB/betaine solution/gel had: a low risk of contact sensitivity; could help debridement during wound cleansing; aided effective wound bed preparation; reduced wound size, odour and exudate; improved pain control; reduced microbial load; and enhanced wound healing. The results of three studies indicated that both 0.1% PHMB and saline solution were effective in reducing bacterial load, while another showed that adding 0.1% PHMB to tie-over dressings had no effect on reducing bacterial loads in wounds. Another study concluded that disinfection and granulation of pressure ulcers with hydrobalance dressing with 0.3% PHMB was faster and more effective than using 0.1% PHMB/betaine.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this literature review showed that 0.1% PHMB/betaine solution/gel appeared to be useful and safe for wound cleansing, was effective in removing soft debris and slough from the wound bed, and created a wound environment optimal for healing. Although these actions cannot be attributed solely to this treatment modality, these results do highlight the unique action of this combined product. However, more robust studies are needed to confirm these results.

Contact allergy to polyhexamethylene biguanide (polyaminopropyl biguanide)

Background

Polyaminopropyl biguanide (INCI name) and polyhexamethylene biguanide (PHMB) are polymeric biguanides. PHMB is a broad‐spectrum antimicrobial substance used as a preservative in many products. Due to our limited knowledge on PHMB contact allergy frequency and the fact that cases of allergic contact dermatitis to PHMB might be missed, we have included PHMB as a screening allergen since 2016.

Objective

To report the prevalence of positive patch test reactions to PHMB as a screening allergen in patients with suspected allergic contact dermatitis.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of 1760 patch tested patients from July 2016 to December 2018 was performed. Polyaminopropyl biguanide 2.0% aqua was included in the extended Malmö baseline series during the study period.

Results

Of all patients, 1204 (68.4%) were female. Positive patch test reactions were reported in 19 patients (1.1%). The most common sites of lesions were face, head, and neck (52.6%). There was a significant correlation between concomitant reactions to PHMB and other cosmetic‐related allergens.

Conclusion

The prevalence of positive reactions to PHMB was higher than that previously reported. Patch testing with PHMB should be performed in patients with dermatitis who have lesions on the face, head, and neck.

Contact Allergy: A Review of Current Problems from a Clinical Perspective

Contact allergy is common, affecting 27% of the general population in Europe. Original publications, including case reports, published since 2016 (inclusive) were identified with the aim of collating a full review of current problems in the field. To this end, a literature search employing methods of systematic reviewing was performed in the Medline^® and Web of Science™ databases on 28 January 2018, using the search terms (“contact sensitization” or “contact allergy”). Of 446 non-duplicate publications identified by above search, 147 were excluded based on scrutiny of title, abstract and key words. Of the remaining 299 examined in full text, 291 were deemed appropriate for inclusion, and main findings were summarised in topic sections. In conclusion, diverse sources of exposures to chemicals of widely-differing types and structures, continue to induce sensitisation in man and may result in allergic contact dermatitis. Many of the chemicals are “evergreen” but others are “newcomers”. Vigilance and proper investigation (patch testing) are required to detect and inform of the presence of these haptens to which our populations remain exposed.