A quick look at the pros and cons of four effective options.

BARE NARES When used properly, nasal decolonization regimens can greatly reduce the risk of surgical site infections.
Preoperative nasal decolonization has become a widely used, viable tool for preventing surgical site infections (SSIs). This relatively inexpensive practice addresses the most common gathering site of infectious materials such as S. aureus. However, there remains a lack of consensus on the most effective and reliable nasal decolonization regimen.
The peer-reviewed literature that has developed around this topic identified four effective treatments. Edward Septimus, MD, an infectious disease specialist and professor of internal medicine at Texas A&M College of Medicine in Houston, discusses the options:
- Mupirocin. Dr. Septimus calls this "the classic treatment" with the highest volume of supporting literature, but it presents a strong patient compliance challenge. "Mupirocin use requires screening patients at least a week in advance, and then patients must strictly follow the application regimen at home for five days," he says. Concern is also growing about mupirocin resistance, due to its wide use over many years. "Mupirocin's colonization eradication rate typically is extremely high (93% to 95%), but if there's high-level mupirocin resistance, you often get no reduction in colonization," explains Dr. Septimus. "With intermediate or low-level resistance, there may be a transient reduction in the number of organisms, but a quick rebound takes place at the end of the first week. In terms of surgical prophylaxis, we still don't know if a transient reduction is good enough." While there hasn't been a major shift away from mupirocin, he says the trend is to identify something better and easier to use.
- Povidone-iodine (PI). One advantage of PI is that no resistance to S. aureus has been reported, says Dr. Septimus, but a greater one lies in this regimen's design. "You don't need to worry about screening patients days in advance," he says. "You simply administer PI in the pre-op area before surgery with two applications in each nostril twice. It's a much simpler regimen that's especially attractive to outpatient surgery centers." While PI lacks mupirocin's volume of evidence, the literature around it is growing. Dr. Septimus warns, however, that all PI isn't created equal, as products specifically indicated for intranasal use contain chemicals that help the agent attach better to the nasal mucosa. These specialized preparations are multiple times more expensive than generic swabs, according to Dr. Septimus. "Stick with the intranasal preparation until someone proves over-the-counter versions are more effective," he advises. "Sure, it's more expensive than a generic formulation, but it's not nearly as expensive as an SSI."
- Alcohol-based antiseptic. At least one peer-reviewed study confirms the potential efficacy of alcohol-based swabs, says Dr. Septimus. "The mitigating issue with alcohol is that it has a very short duration of action," he explains. "It must be applied multiple times a day, which leads to compliance issues."
- Photodynamic therapy. Dr. Septimus calls this emerging regimen developing in Canada "fascinating." Not yet FDA-approved, it carries no compliance concerns, as it's applied just before surgery. "You place a material in the nose, generally methylene blue," says Dr. Septimus. "Then you deliver a wavelength of photodynamic therapy that combines with the methylene blue to eradicate bacteria very safely." Although U.S. centers can't yet employ this method, Dr. Septimus says it's worth monitoring.
"The nasal decolonization picture will likely become clearer in the next couple of years," says Dr. Septimus. "It's too early to say which is the best. For now, the important thing is to fully understand how each agent works, and follow related evidence-based protocols to the letter."