Effect of electrolyzed strong acid water on peritoneal irrigation of experimental perforated peritonitis

Electrolyzed strong acid water (ESAW) is generated by the electrolysis of a weak sodium chloride solution. Although ESAW is known to have a strong bactericidal activity and to be harmless to the living body, its effectiveness and safety in the treatment of perforated peritonitis has not been well established. Male Wistar rats were used for the study. Three hours after cecal ligation and puncture, the cecum was resected and the peritoneal cavity was irrigated with 50 ml of saline (Group S, n=12) or ESAW (Group E, n=14). The 5-day survival rate was compared between the two groups. In another pair of animals (n=10 each), bacteria in the ascitic fluid were counted at 6 and 18 h after irrigation. No adverse effects of ESAW were observed in the experimental group. The 5-day survival rate was 25% (3/12) and 85.7% (12/14) in Groups S and E, respectively (P < 0.01). The bacterial count at 18 h after the irrigation in Groups S and E was (5.0 +/- 2.5) x 10(5)/ml and (2.2 +/- 2.0) x 10(4)/ml, respectively (P < 0.0001). Peritoneal lavage with ESAW had no adverse effect, and achieved more effective decontamination than saline for perforated peritonitis. Therefore, the results of this study are considered to warrant and support the clinical application of ESAW.

Efficacy and safety of strong acid electrolyzed water for peritoneal lavage to prevent surgical site infection in patients with perforated appendicitis

Purpose: Our previous experimental study of perforated peritonitis in rats proved that peritoneal lavage with strong acid electrolyzed water (SAEW) has no adverse effects, reduces the bacteria count in the ascitic fluid more effectively than saline, and increases the survival rate significantly. Thus, we conducted a randomized controlled study, applying SAEW in the treatment of perforated appendicitis in children. Methods: Forty-four patients, aged 3-14 years, were randomly divided into two groups: Group S (n = 20), in which the peritoneal cavity was lavaged with 100 ml/kg saline and the wound was washed out with 200 ml saline; and Group E (n = 24), in which the peritoneal cavity was lavaged with 100 ml/kg SAEW and the wound was washed out with 200 ml SAEW. Results: No adverse effect of SAEW was observed in Group E. There was no difference in the bacterial evanescence ratio of ascitic fluid after lavage between Groups S and E (11.1 and 15.8%, respectively). A residual abscess developed in one patient from each group (5.0 and 4.2%, respectively). The incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) was significantly lower in Group E than in Group S (0 and 20%, respectively; P < 0.05). There was no difference in the duration of pyrexia, positive C-reactive protein, leukocytosis, or hospital stay between the groups. Conclusion: Peritoneal lavage and wound washing with SAEW have no adverse effects and are effective for preventing SSI.