The new formulation of the 0,05% sodium hypochlorite electrolytic solution for cutaneous use: reasons and advantages

Abstract

Superinfection of skin lesions is quite common, and often delays wound recovery. Infection control plays therefore a key role in the management of skin lesions, requiring the use of specific antimicrobials. Among available agents, topic antiseptic drugs are currently recommended as a first-choice option, to be preferred to antibiotics, given the growing resistance to these drugs. Compared to antibiotics, antiseptic drugs have a wider spectrum of action, including bacteria, fungi, virus, protozoa, and prions. The ideal antiseptic for the management of an infected skin lesion is expected to be both highly effective and well tolerated, in order to promote the physiologic process of tissue restoration. Among available antiseptics, the 0,05% sodium hypochlorite electrolytic solution meets these criteria: the product proved to be effective in vitro and in animal experimental models against a wide range of microorganisms, besides exerting an anti-inflammatory action in the absence of any irritating, cytotoxic or carcinogenic adverse effect, and being useful in biofilm removal. Similarly, in several clinical trials, the 0,05% sodium hypochlorite electrolytic solution was demonstrated to be very effective and safe in the management of infected skin wounds: based on these results, this product should be strongly considered among the first-choice options for the disinfection of skin wounds. The new formulation, developed according to the latest reference standards for wound healing and in agreement with current guidelines, is qualitatively improved, with an expected positive impact in every field of clinical application and a subsequent benefit for treated patients.

What COVID‐19 taught us: New opportunities and pathways from telemedicine and novel antiseptics in wound healing

“…25 Biofilm is characterised by slowgrowing bacteria, which develop multidrug tolerance, and the extracellular matrix 5 prevents the action of orally administered antibiotic therapy, resulting in the establishment of antibiotic resistance, 26 often associated with the indiscriminate abuse of systemic therapy. 27 Factors that might be involved in the establishment of wound healing are reported in Figure 1.…”

“…37,38 A critically infected or colonised wound must be treated with systemic antibiotics in order to treat the infection, restore the microenvironment and to facilitate healing. 27 On the other hand, the risk of sepsis is null, wounds must be dressed with antiseptics, defined as chemical/based agents, which are able to reduce the bacterial load. 39 Because the aim of the wound care consists in removing the non-vital tissue, to prevent the infections, to promote the healing and to control the pain, 40 an antiseptic must be aggressive on biofilm and non-viable tissues, but also it should ideally show a similar tolerability than physiological saline solution, Ringer solution or inert hydrogels.…”

“… 29 On the other hand, this route is characterised by some limitations, such as the depth of penetration, possible side effects, the potential cellular damage and the patient compliance. 27 …”

“…These bacteria can be free or can create a biofilm, a complex structure consisting of bacterial cells, extracellular matrix and extra polymeric substance (EPS) 25 . Biofilm is characterised by slow‐growing bacteria, which develop multidrug tolerance, and the extracellular matrix 5 prevents the action of orally administered antibiotic therapy, resulting in the establishment of antibiotic resistance, 26 often associated with the indiscriminate abuse of systemic therapy 27 …”

“…Antibiotics‐free antimicrobials are administered through the cutaneous route, which may guarantee a high concentration and is characterised by a lower risk to develop resistance 29 . On the other hand, this route is characterised by some limitations, such as the depth of penetration, possible side effects, the potential cellular damage and the patient compliance 27 …”