Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital

Chlorhexidine allergy in the perioperative setting: a narrative review

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftReviewForskningpeer review


  1. Minimising droplet and virus spread during and after tracheal extubation

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftLetterForskningpeer review

  2. Enhanced recovery after surgery components and perioperative outcomes: a nationwide observational study

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. Sphenopalatine ganglion block for the treatment of postdural puncture headache: a randomised, blinded, clinical trial

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  4. Use of the GRADE approach in systematic reviews and guidelines

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftLederForskningpeer review

  1. Perioperative anaphylaxis in children: Etiology, time sequence, and patterns of clinical reactivity

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. An EAACI position paper on the investigation of perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. Undersøgelse og diagnostik af allergiske lidelser en kort gennemgang for tandlæger

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelFormidling

  4. Chlorhexidine Allergy: Mild Allergic Reactions Can Precede Anaphylaxis in the Healthcare Setting

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  5. Drug provocation testing: risk stratification is key

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Vis graf over relationer

Chlorhexidine is an antiseptic with a broad spectrum of activity and a persistent effect on skin. Consequently, it has become an ubiquitous antiseptic in healthcare and the community. As use has become widespread, increasing numbers of cases of allergy have been reported in the literature, including cases of anaphylaxis to chlorhexidine gels used on mucous membranes, chlorhexidine-impregnated devices such as central venous catheters, chlorhexidine preparations used on wounds and broken skin, and cases after dental procedures. Numerous governmental warnings have been issued over recent decades to warn of the risk of allergy to chlorhexidine on mucosal surfaces or in medical devices. Whilst the number of published cases likely underestimates the true prevalence of reactions, we retrospectively surveyed clinics with experience in investigating perioperative chlorhexidine allergy. Despite differences in investigation practice before the survey took place, 13 clinics responded which together had diagnosed 252 cases of anaphylaxis to chlorhexidine, and cases of delayed allergy. In eight of 13 clinics, chlorhexidine was within the top four most commonly diagnosed causes of perioperative anaphylaxis. Despite this, the incidence of anaphylaxis to chlorhexidine is low given that patients are very commonly exposed. Sensitisation of healthcare workers can occur, but is uncommon. Before exposing patients to this antiseptic, consideration of the potential risk vs benefit should be undertaken, particularly for higher risk exposures, such as mucosal exposure or i.v. exposure via impregnated lines. Difficulties exist in protecting patients with known allergies from re-exposure to chlorhexidine, which would be improved with uniform labelling and chlorhexidine product registers.

TidsskriftBritish Journal of Anaesthesia
Udgave nummer1
Sider (fra-til)e95-e103
StatusUdgivet - jul. 2019

Bibliografisk note

Crown Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

ID: 59000833