A Hospital Based Prospective Study to Compare the Outcome of Perianal Surgery Wound when Using Silver Colloidal Solution Spray V/S Povidone Iodine Sitz-Bath

Background: The pain of anal ulcer is intolerable and always disproportionate to the severity of the physical lesion. Many different wound irrigation solutions, including soaps, antibiotics and antiseptics, have been used to reduce surgical site infection. The aim of this study to compare the outcome of perianal surgery wound when using silver colloidal solution spray v/s povidone iodine sitz-bath. Materials & Methods: A hospital based prospective study done 50 patients of perianal surgery with ASA I or II, attending the district hospital Dholpur, in our surgical unit over a period 1 year. Critically ill patients and patients with underlying bone osteomyelitis or malignancy were excluded. Fifty patients were randomly assigned to receive silver colloidal solution spray (Group A) or a twice-daily sitz bath along with povidone iodine (Group B). Weekly pain score and patient satisfaction score were evaluated on visual analogue scores. Results: Our study showed that there was no significant difference in age, gender distribution and the number of excised haemorrhoid piles between the two groups. No significant difference in postoperative mean pain score between groups (P >0.05) was noticed. The satisfaction score was higher in the sitz bath group with povidone iodine when compared with the silver colloidal solution spray group; however, it did not reach a statistically significant level. Conclusion: We concluded that povidone-iodine with sitz bath may be effective in preventing surgical site infection as compare to silver colloidal solution spray. However, more studies, especially double-blind RCTs, should be conducted to determine the “ideal” solution of povidone-iodine irrigation as well as specific risks associated with its use