Special Water Treatment Prevents Infection After Appendix Surgery
- Authors
- Akio Kubota, Taro Goda, Tomomitsu Tsuru, Takeo Yonekura, Makoto Yagi, Hisayoshi Kawahara, Akihiro Yoneda, Yuko Tazuke, Gakuto Tani, Tomohiro Ishii, Satoshi Umeda, Katsuhisa Hirano
- Journal
- Surgery Today
- Year
- 2015
- DOI
- 10.1007/s00595-014-1050-x
- Study Type
- Human
- Outcome
- Positive
- Peer Reviewed
- Yes
- Country
- Japan
- Health Condition
- Perforated Appendicitis
- Body System
- Digestive System
TL;DR
Washing the abdominal cavity and surgical wounds with strong acid electrolyzed water (SAEW) during surgery for burst appendix in children is safe and reduces the risk of infection at the surgical site.
Key Finding
Children who received strong acid electrolyzed water for surgical irrigation had zero surgical site infections compared to 20% in the saline group, with no adverse effects reported.
Summary
This study tested whether a special type of water created through electrolysis (a chemical process using electricity) could reduce infections after appendix surgery in children. Forty-four children with a ruptured appendix were randomly given either regular salt water or the electrolyzed water to rinse their surgical area. The electrolyzed water group had no surgical site infections compared to 20% in the salt water group, and no harmful side effects were observed.
Practical Takeaway
While this small human study in children undergoing appendix surgery suggests electrolyzed water may help prevent surgical infections, it is limited to a specific surgical context and patient population. The study does not address hydrogen water as a beverage or general health product, so these results cannot be applied to drinking hydrogen water. More research would be needed to determine if similar benefits apply to other surgical situations or non-surgical uses.
Abstract
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.