ArticlePloS one2022
An in vitro comparison of antimicrobial efficacy and cytotoxicity between povidone-iodine and chlorhexidine for treating clinical endometritis in dairy cows.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Virulence factors and therapeutic methods ofVirulence · 2025Review
- Evaluation of the Preoperative Antiseptic Efficacy of Ozone on Dog Skin in Comparison with Traditional Methods.Veterinary sciences · 2025Article
- Reviewing the complexities of bacterial biocide susceptibility and in vitro biocide adaptation methodologies.npj antimicrobials and resistance · 2025Review
- Article
- In Vitro Effect ofVeterinary sciences · 2023Article
- The Optimal Effective Concentration Combination (OPECC) as a Novel Method for Evaluating the Effects of Binary Application of Antibacterial Compounds.Microorganisms · 2023Article
- The Impact of Antiseptic-Loaded Bacterial Nanocellulose on Different Biofilms-An Effective Treatment for Chronic Wounds?Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to assess the in vitro antimicrobial effects of chlorhexidine (CHX) and povidone-iodine (PI) on clinical isolates of Escherichia coli (E. coli) and Trueperella pyogenes (T. pyogenes) from the vaginal discharge of dairy cows, as well as to compare the cytotoxicity effects of CHX and PI on bovine endometrial epithelial cells (BEnEpC). In Experiment 1, 12 E. coli and 10 T. pyogenes were isolated from the vaginal discharge of cows with a uterine infection. The MIC and MBC against CHX and PI were analyzed in vitro. In Experiment 2, the cytotoxicity effects of CHX and PI on BEnEpC were analyzed using a Viability/Cytotoxicity Kit, wound scratch healing assay, and the expression of pro-inflammatory cytokine genes (IL-6, IL-8, and TNF-α). In Experiment 1, the MIC and MBC values of CHX against E. coli were 0.0002% and 0.0002 to 0.00025%, respectively. The MIC and MBC values of PI were 1.25 to 2.5% and 1.25 to 5%, respectively. For T. pyogenes, the MIC and MBC values of CHX were 0.00002%. The MIC and MBC values of PI were 1.25%. In Experiment 2, the cell viability significantly decreased, and wound closures were significantly inhibited after treatment with ≥ 0.002% CHX and ≥ 0.025% PI. The expression of IL-6, IL-8, and TNF-α significantly increased after treatment with PI. Only IL-6 showed a significant increase after cells were treated with 0.00002% and 0.0002% CHX. The results suggested that both CHX and PI had high antibacterial effects. However, veterinarians and farmers should be aware of their cytotoxicity, which decrease viability of endometrial epithelial cells and inhibit wound healing in vitro.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.