ArticleJournal of ophthalmic inflammation and infection2025
In vitro efficacy of aqueous PVP-iodine solution below 5% as alternative to preoperative antisepsis in ophthalmology as the basis for an in vivo study.
Article in Journal of ophthalmic inflammation and infection, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Management of Dry Eye Disease Pre- and Post-Cataract Surgery: A Personalized Approach.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePre-operative antisepsis of the conjunctiva is indicated prior to intraocular surgery to prevent post-interventional endophthalmitis. In Germany, antisepsis with 5% povidone-iodine (PI) aqueous solution is explicitly required prior to intravitreal injections (IVI), and also generally recommended for intraocular surgery. However, this concentration often leads to a foreign body sensation and an unpleasant burning in combination with dry eye symptoms. Postoperative eye pain, persistent corneal epithelial defects, and a risk of keratitis are further side effects. Due to the repetitive nature of IVI, these symptoms are particularly present in IVI patients. A reduced concentration may be favorable to decrease patient discomfort. A 1.25% PI solution does not increase the iodine concentration in the aqueous humor and is also used for prophylaxis of ophthalmia neonatorum and for preoperative antisepsis; in both cases the renal iodine excretion stays in a physiological range thus thyroid diseases are no contraindication for its use. Thus, the efficacy of reduced concentrations of PI should be evaluated in vitro.
methodsPI with dilutions below 5% (0.625 - 2.5% serial 1:2 dilution) was tested in vitro in a quantitative suspension assay and in a quantitative carrier test without and with addition of matrices to identify their antimicrobial effect against Staphylococcus epidermidis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Cutibacterium acnes and Candida albicans.
resultsNo differences in the antimicrobial effect was seen due to reduced concentrations of PI in comparison to a 5% solution. However, a trend was seen regarding the required contact time of the antiseptic solution.
conclusionThe in-vitro tests have shown adequate antisepsis of 1.25% PI prior to intraocular surgery. However, it is important to pay attention to a sufficient contact time of the antiseptic of about 1 min before ophthalmologic intervention. In order to give final recommendations, in vivo testing is needed to build a robust data foundation.
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.