Antisepsis

Also: antiseptic surgery, antiseptic method, Listerism

Killing or holding back the germs in a wound and on everything that touches it, the practice that from the late 1860s began to cut deaths from infection after surgery.

Questions this entry answers

  • What is the difference between antisepsis and asepsis?
  • Who introduced antiseptic surgery?
  • How did doctors fight wound infection in 1917?

Definition

Antisepsis is the use of chemicals to kill or inhibit microorganisms in a wound, on the skin, or on instruments and dressings, so that infection does not take hold. It is different from asepsis, which aims to keep germs out of an operation in the first place, with heat-sterilised instruments, gowns and gloves. Modern surgery uses both.

Historical context

Ancient physicians washed wounds with wine or vinegar and dressed them with honey or pitch. They had no concept of germs. Any explanation of why some of this helped is modern, not theirs.

In 1847 Ignaz Semmelweis, in Vienna, had doctors wash their hands in a chlorinated lime solution, and deaths from childbed fever on his ward fell. In 1867 Joseph Lister, in Glasgow, published an antiseptic method built on Louis Pasteur's work on microorganisms, using carbolic acid on wounds, dressings and instruments. By the end of the century, sterilising by heat was replacing much of the chemical approach.

How it worked

  1. Before the operation. Instruments, the surgeon's hands and the patient's skin were washed in antiseptic solution.
  2. During it. Lister applied carbolic acid to the wound and, for a time, used a carbolic spray in the air of the operating room. He later gave up the spray.
  3. Afterwards. Dressings soaked in antiseptic covered the wound and were changed with the same care.

The First World War tested the method hard. Shell fragments drove soil, cloth and manure into the body. Surgeons cut away dead tissue and irrigated wounds; the Carrel-Dakin method, introduced in 1915, flushed them repeatedly with a dilute hypochlorite solution.

What it meant for the patient, the soldier, the civilian

Before antisepsis, a patient could survive an operation and die of it a week later. The wound reddened, swelled and drained pus, and fever followed. People feared hospitals for this reason.

Antisepsis reduced that risk. It did not remove it. Carbolic acid also irritated the skin of the hands that used it and the wounds it touched. And in a disaster, with every bed taken, a wound might wait hours or days to be cleaned at all.

Examples from history

  • Halifax, December 1917. Capt. Frederick Tooke, a Montreal eye surgeon, wrote that nearly every face wound he saw was already septic. Among his own patients he credited ordinary laundry soap and argyrol, a silver-based antiseptic then common in eye care, for having only one infection.

Sources

Sources listed
4
Checked against the source
0
Not yet checked
4

Primary source

  1. Lister, Joseph. "On the Antiseptic Principle in the Practice of Surgery." The Lancet, 1867.

    Not yet checked against the source

Scholarly secondary source

  1. Porter, Roy. The Greatest Benefit to Mankind. A Medical History of Humanity. HarperCollins, 1997.

    Not yet checked against the source
  2. Majno, Guido. The Healing Hand. Man and Wound in the Ancient World. Harvard University Press, 1975.

    Not yet checked against the source
  3. McAlister, C. N., Murray, T. J., Lakosha, H., Maxner, C. E. "The Halifax disaster (1917). Eye injuries and their care." British Journal of Ophthalmology 2007;91:832–5. View source

    Not yet checked against the source

Know a better source or see an error? Send a correction.