{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017543859649122806, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0018467220683287165, 'mean_word_length': 5.3023255813953485, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Clinical and bacteriologic course of wounds as a function of various protocols of local antisepsis].

Antiseptics are drugs, and they must be prescribed by physicians. A correct use allows a favourable evolution of the wounds, and could avoid some amputations. The authors have realized a randomized study, to compare the reliability of a sequence using Eosine and an antiseptic (Chlorhexidine or polyvinylpyrolidone (PVP) iodine) to a more usual sequence using chlorhexidine of PVP iodine alone according with the initial pH of the wound. After fifteen days, if no clinical and bacteriological improvement occurred, the Dakin solution was used. The clinical and bacteriological survey has showed that the sequence with Eosine produced significantly more failures and that there was no significant difference between Chlorhexidine and PVP iodine. The use of the Dakin solution 15 days after inefficacy of the antisepsis previously used allowed a cicatrisation of the wound in about six days. There was no demonstrable resistance of microorganisms to the previously used antiseptics.