-
Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) Jan 2023Povidone iodine (PVPI) is an antiseptic widely used against a broad spectrum of pathogens. However, undesired side-effects are still associated with PVPI treatment due...
Povidone iodine (PVPI) is an antiseptic widely used against a broad spectrum of pathogens. However, undesired side-effects are still associated with PVPI treatment due to the irritant effect of iodine. Reducing the concentration of a PVPI formulation could provide safer and more friendly formulations, for routine use and applications in very delicate organs such as the eye. However, managing the storage of a low-concentration solution of PVPI is challenging due to the high iodine volatility. In this study, we demonstrated that an amphiphilic -sulfonato-calix[4]arene derivative forming micelles (SC4OC6) improves the stability of a 0.1% PVPI aqueous buffered solution. UV-vis and NMR spectra as well as dynamic and electrophoretic light scattering measurements showed that SC4OC6 establishes non-covalent supramolecular interactions with PVPI, resulting in the formation of nanoaggregates with a negatively charged surface. Isothermal titration calorimetry provided the aggregation parameters and evidenced that the formation of the supramolecular assembly is an enthalpically favored process. The interaction of SC4OC6 with PVPI enhances the iodine retention and stability of the solution without affecting the rapid and effective bactericidal activity of PVPI, as demonstrated by a time-killing assay with .
PubMed: 36678039
DOI: 10.3390/nano13020286 -
Acta Otorhinolaryngologica Italica :... Aug 2021Nowadays, povidone-iodine is commonly used as a disinfectant in head and neck procedures. The present study investigated the effect of povidone-iodine, which is used as... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
OBJECTIVE
Nowadays, povidone-iodine is commonly used as a disinfectant in head and neck procedures. The present study investigated the effect of povidone-iodine, which is used as a disinfectant solution in tympanoplasty, on patients' hearing.
METHODS
A povidone-iodine solution was used as disinfection in chronic otitis media patients undergoing tympanoplasty. In the intervention group, 5% povidone-iodine, was applied to the external auditory canal and remained there for 10 minutes. In the control group, povidone-iodine was used but not allowed to enter the external auditory canal by inserting cotton wool into the canal. To evaluate the adverse effect of povidone-iodine on hearing, the bone conduction level was compared between groups at baseline and one month after exposure.
RESULTS
Bone conduction levels at frequencies 500 Hz, 1 kHz, 2 kHz, 3 kHz, 4 kHz and 8 kHz and mean of bone conduction level in 500 Hz, 1 kHz and 2 kHz were measured and compared respectively between intervention and control group. No significant difference was seen between bone conduction levels of above frequencies and mean frequencies before and one month after surgery. (P-value = 0.321, 0.432, 0.219, 0.489, 0.61, 0.112, 0.324 respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
According to the present study, currently available 5% povidone-iodine did not affect hearing and therefore, can be comfortably used for preparation and disinfection in otologic surgeries.
Topics: Bone Conduction; Ear Canal; Humans; Otitis Media; Povidone-Iodine; Tympanoplasty
PubMed: 34533542
DOI: 10.14639/0392-100X-N1369 -
Ghana Medical Journal Jun 2023the aim was to compare 2 drops of either 5% chloramphenicol, 1% povidone-iodine or 5% povidone-iodine before cataract surgery on reducing the colonisation of bacterial... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
OBJECTIVES
the aim was to compare 2 drops of either 5% chloramphenicol, 1% povidone-iodine or 5% povidone-iodine before cataract surgery on reducing the colonisation of bacterial flora in the conjunctiva.
DESIGN
This was a double-blind, randomised clinical trial study.
SETTING
Patients referred to Shahid Sadoughi Hospital in Yazd, Iran, for cataract surgery were studied.
PARTICIPANTS
Totally 260 patients were enrolled.
INTERVENTION
The affected lower fornix was gently sampled with a sterile swab and cultured on appropriate microbiological media. Then one of the 3 solutions mentioned above was instilled into the conjunctival sac of the cases in groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively. After thirty minutes, new conjunctival swabs were taken and cultured.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
The type of bacteria isolated and their colony-forming unit per mL (CFU/mL) number were primary end-points. The statistical tests of Phi and Cramer's V and Wilcoxon and Kruskal-Wallis were applied to evaluate the relationship between the studied variables and culture results as the secondary end-point.
RESULTS
The studied patients were 129 (49.6%) males and 131 (50.4%) females. Bacterial growth was observed in 49 cases (18.85%); the most commonly isolated bacteria were (71.42%). In the povidone-iodine 5% and chloramphenicol groups (but not the povidone-iodine 1%), the decrease in the number of CFU/mL was statistically significant (P = 0.032 and P = 0.005, respectively, Wilcoxon test).
CONCLUSION
A single dose of povidone-iodine 5% and chloramphenicol effectively reduces the colonisation of normal conjunctival bacteria and can be used as effective prophylaxis.
FUNDING
This study was part of an MSc thesis of Nasrin Tofighi. Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran, funded this work.
Topics: Male; Female; Humans; Povidone-Iodine; Chloramphenicol; Ophthalmic Solutions; Conjunctiva; Bacteria; Cataract
PubMed: 38504751
DOI: 10.4314/gmj.v57i2.1 -
Journal of the Formosan Medical... May 2022The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection that is mainly through the airborne transmission, is a worldwide health concern. This review seeks to... (Review)
Review
The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection that is mainly through the airborne transmission, is a worldwide health concern. This review seeks to assess the potential effectiveness of mouthwash in reducing the oropharyngeal load of SARS-CoV-2 based on the available evidence. Articles related to mouthwash and COVID-19 in PubMed were electronically searched in July, 2021. After manually excluding articles lacking sufficient scientific evidence or validation processes, those with inaccessible online full text, those that did not test the effectiveness of mouthwash against SARS-CoV-2, and those not written in English, 17 original and 13 review articles were chosen for this review. The eligible articles revealed that the main virucidal mechanism of mouthwash was via interactions with the viral envelope. Povidone-iodine (PVP-I), cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC), and essential oils with ethanol showed virucidal effects on SARS-CoV-2 in vitro, potentially by interfering with the viral envelope. A few clinical studies demonstrated that PVP-I, CPC, hydrogen peroxide, and chlorhexidine reduced the oropharyngeal load of SARS-CoV-2. Although the available evidence is limited, mouthwash containing PVP-I or CPC shows potential for reducing the oropharyngeal load of SARS-CoV-2 and thus may present a risk-mitigation strategy for COVID-19 patients.
Topics: COVID-19; Humans; Mouthwashes; Pandemics; Povidone-Iodine; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 34666923
DOI: 10.1016/j.jfma.2021.10.001 -
International Journal of Clinical... 2020Combined use of povidone iodine (PI) along with topical fluorides (TF) has been suggested as a promising strategy to reduce dental caries incidence and cariogenic... (Review)
Review
Comparing the Effectiveness of Topical Fluoride and Povidone Iodine with Topical Fluoride Alone for the Prevention of Dental Caries among Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Combined use of povidone iodine (PI) along with topical fluorides (TF) has been suggested as a promising strategy to reduce dental caries incidence and cariogenic bacterial load. However, the available literature presents mixed evidence regarding its effectiveness as compared to TF application alone.
AIM AND OBJECTIVE
'TF + PI' vs TF alone in the prevention of dental caries among 1-12-year-old children assessed through caries increment and mean and counts.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Five databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EBSCOhost, PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science) were searched for relevant literature. Out of 72 studies that were screened, 7 eligible studies were included out of which 4 studies were subjected to meta-analysis. The generic inverse variance test was used to assess the primary outcome reported as mean ± SD/events occurred (caries incidence), whereas for mean post-intervention colony count, inverse variance function was used. The Cochrane's Collaboration tool and Modified Downs and Black scoring criteria were used to evaluate the quality of the included articles. Heterogeneity across the studies was assessed using the statistic. Statistical significance was set at < 0.05.
RESULTS
Overall, for primary and permanent dentition combined, the dental caries incidence was found to be significantly lower in the 'TF + PI' combined therapy group as compared to TF alone [SMD -0.4 (-0.78 to -0.03), = 0.04]. The two groups showed no significant difference with respect to post-intervention count [SMD -0.1 (-0.57 to +0.37), = 0.69]. No study was found that compared post-intervention count between the two groups.
CONCLUSION
Based on the pooled analysis from the limited literature available, there is a very low quality of evidence that 'TF + PI' combined therapy is more effective in the prevention of new caries lesions among 1-12-year-old children as compared to TF use alone. Future clinical trials with robust methodologies are recommended to generate conclusive evidence.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
PI application might exert an added benefit with TF in preventing the occurrence of new carious lesions among 1-12-year-old children.
HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE
Gupta A, Nishant, Sharda S, Comparing the Effectiveness of Topical Fluoride and Povidone Iodine with Topical Fluoride Alone for the Prevention of Dental Caries among Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2020;13(5):559-565.
PubMed: 33623347
DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1844 -
Journal of Cataract and Refractive... Jul 2020To test the antiseptic efficacy of povidone-iodine when mixed with topical lidocaine gel.
PURPOSE
To test the antiseptic efficacy of povidone-iodine when mixed with topical lidocaine gel.
SETTING
Emory School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
DESIGN
Experimental study.
METHODS
Staphylococcus epidermidis, Staphylococcus aureus, viridans streptococci (Streptococcus sanguinis), Escherichia coli, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were grown on blood agar plates with povidone-iodine and/or lidocaine gel. The efficacy of sterilization was quantified by surviving bacterial colony-forming units.
RESULTS
Combination of povidone-iodine and lidocaine gel prevented bacterial growth to levels similar to povidone-iodine alone. Application of lidocaine gel to bacteria before povidone-iodine treatment allowed bacterial growth similar to controls not exposed to povidone-iodine.
CONCLUSIONS
Povidone-iodine must be applied before lidocaine gel for effective antisepsis, but admixture of povidone-iodine with lidocaine gel was also effective and may reduce the risk of endophthalmitis associated with lidocaine gel use. This strategy offers a practice-changing alternative for preoperative prophylaxis in procedures requiring topical anesthesia.
Topics: Anesthesia; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Humans; Lidocaine; Povidone-Iodine; Staphylococcus epidermidis
PubMed: 32427643
DOI: 10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000000245 -
American Journal of Obstetrics &... Aug 2023Precesarean vaginal antisepsis can benefit pregnant women with ruptured membranes. However, in the general population, recent trials have shown mixed results in reducing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Precesarean vaginal antisepsis can benefit pregnant women with ruptured membranes. However, in the general population, recent trials have shown mixed results in reducing postoperative infections. This study aimed to systematically review clinical trials and summarize the most suitable vaginal preparations for cesarean delivery in preventing postoperative infection.
DATA SOURCES
We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, SinoMed databases, and the ClinicalTrials.gov clinical trials registry for randomized controlled trials and conference presentations (past 20 years, 2003-2022). Reference lists of previous meta-analyses were searched manually. In addition, we conducted subgroup analysis on the basis of whether the studies were conducted in developed or developing countries, whether the membranes were ruptured, and whether patients were in labor.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials comparing vaginal preparation methods for the prevention of postcesarean infection with each other or with negative controls.
METHODS
Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence. The effectiveness of prevention strategies was assessed by frequentist-based network meta-analysis models. The outcomes were endometritis, postoperative fever, and wound infection.
RESULTS
A total of 23 trials including 10,026 cesarean delivery patients were included in this study. Vaginal preparation methods included 19 iodine-based disinfectants (1%, 5%, and 10% povidone-iodine; 0.4% and 0.5% iodophor) and 4 guanidine-based disinfectants (0.05% and 0.20% chlorhexidine acetate; 1% and 4% chlorhexidine gluconate). Overall, vaginal preparation significantly reduced the risks of endometritis (3.4% vs 8.1%; risk ratio, 0.41 [0.32-0.52]), postoperative fever (7.1% vs 11.4%; risk ratio, 0.58 [0.45-0.74]), and wound infection (4.1% vs 5.4%; risk ratio, 0.73 [0.59-0.90]). With regard to disinfectant type, iodine-based disinfectants (risk ratio, 0.45 [0.35-0.57]) and guanidine-based disinfectants (risk ratio, 0.22 [0.12-0.40]) significantly reduced the risk of endometritis, and iodine-based disinfectants reduced the risk of postoperative fever (risk ratio, 0.58 [0.44-0.77]) and wound infection (risk ratio, 0.75 [0.60-0.94]). With regard to disinfectant concentration, 1% povidone-iodine was most likely to simultaneously reduce the risks of endometritis, postoperative fever, and wound infection.
CONCLUSION
Preoperative vaginal preparation can significantly reduce the risk of postcesarean infectious diseases (endometritis, postoperative fever, and wound infection); 1% povidone-iodine has particularly outstanding effects.
Topics: Humans; Female; Pregnancy; Povidone-Iodine; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Surgical Wound Infection; Endometritis; Network Meta-Analysis; Iodine; Disinfectants; Communicable Diseases
PubMed: 37178722
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.100990 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Nov 2022This systematic review sought to assess the efficacy of combining either sodium hypochlorite or povidone-iodine as disinfection solutions with non-surgical treatment of... (Review)
Review
This systematic review sought to assess the efficacy of combining either sodium hypochlorite or povidone-iodine as disinfection solutions with non-surgical treatment of periodontitis. An electronic search was conducted through PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and Google Scholar from inception until 10 September 2022. Outcomes included clinical outcomes (probing pocket depth, plaque index, clinical attachment level, relative-horizontal attachment level, bleeding on probing, gingival recession, the position of gingival margin) and biochemical (BAPNA level) properties. A subgroup analysis was conducted according to the assessment timepoint. Ten studies reporting the use of povidone-iodine and five studies reporting the use of sodium hypochlorite were included in this review. Overall, in the meta-analysis of povidone-iodine, no significant changes were noted in any of the assessed outcomes; however, minor changes were noted in probing pocket depth and clinical attachment level at a specific timepoint. Regarding sodium hypochlorite, a significant reduction in all clinical outcomes, except for bleeding on probing, was noted. In conclusion, the use of povidone-iodine does not result in an improvement in clinical outcomes, whereas sodium hypochlorite has promising properties that result in significant improvement in probing pocket depth and clinical attachment level. However, more studies are needed to confirm these observations.
PubMed: 36362818
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11216593 -
Life (Basel, Switzerland) May 2023Hydrogen peroxide, povidone-iodine, and chlorhexidine are antiseptics that are commonly added to irrigants to either prevent or treat infection. There are little...
Hydrogen peroxide, povidone-iodine, and chlorhexidine are antiseptics that are commonly added to irrigants to either prevent or treat infection. There are little clinical data available that demonstrate efficacy of adding antiseptics to irrigants in the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection after biofilm establishment. The objective of the study was to assess the bactericidal activity of the antiseptics on planktonic and biofilm. For planktonic irrigation, was exposed to different concentrations of antiseptics. biofilm was developed by submerging a Kirschner wire into normalized bacteria and allowing it to grow for forty-eight hours. The Kirschner wire was then treated with irrigation solutions and plated for CFU analysis. Hydrogen peroxide, povidone-iodine, and chlorhexidine were bactericidal against planktonic bacteria with over a 3 log reduction ( < 0.0001). Unlike cefazolin, the antiseptics were not bactericidal (less than 3 log reduction) against biofilm bacteria but did have a statistical reduction in biofilm as compared to the initial time point ( < 0.0001). As compared to cefazolin treatment alone, the addition of hydrogen peroxide or povidone-iodine to cefazolin treatment only additionally reduced the biofilm burden by less than 1 log. The antiseptics demonstrated bactericidal properties with planktonic ; however, when used to irrigate biofilms, these antiseptics were unable to decrease biofilm mass below a 3 log reduction, suggesting that biofilm has a tolerance to antiseptics. This information should be considered when considering antibiotic tolerance in established biofilm treatment.
PubMed: 37374013
DOI: 10.3390/life13061230 -
International Journal of Environmental... Sep 2022Severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a global and evolving pandemic associated with heavy health and financial burdens. Considering the oral... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a global and evolving pandemic associated with heavy health and financial burdens. Considering the oral cavity as the major reservoir for SARS-CoV-2, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess the efficacy of mouth rinses and nasal sprays in reducing the salivary viral load of SARS-CoV-2. All and studies that assessed the virucidal efficacy of mouth rinses and nasal sprays against SARS-CoV-2 and were published in the English language from December 2019 to April 2022 were considered for analyses. Special Medical Subject Headings terms were used to search Pubmed, Scopus, Embase Ovid, and Web of Science databases. The toxicological data reliability assessment tool (ToxRToool) was used to assess the quality of the included studies. Thirty-three studies (11 and 22 ) were deemed eligible for inclusion in this analysis. Results of the pooled data showed that povidone-iodine is the most efficacious intervention in terms of reducing the SARS-CoV-2 salivary viral load, followed by chlorhexidine. The mean difference in the viral load was 86% and 72%, respectively. Similarly, povidone-iodine was associated with the highest log reduction value (LRV) , followed by cetylpyridinium chloride, (LRV = 2.938 ( < 0.0005) and LRV = 2.907 ( = 0.009), respectively). Povidone-iodine-based oral and nasal preparations showed favourable results in terms of reducing SARS-CoV-2 viral loads both and . Considering the limited number of patients , further studies among larger cohorts are recommended.
Topics: COVID-19; Cetylpyridinium; Chlorhexidine; Humans; Mouthwashes; Nasal Sprays; Povidone-Iodine; Reproducibility of Results; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 36231450
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191912148