ArticleIndian journal of ophthalmology2026
Comparative efficacy of single and double povidone-iodine soaking protocols combined with draping sequence in donor cornea disinfection.
Article in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the effectiveness of three povidone-iodine disinfection protocols on donor corneoscleral rim contamination and to identify factors influencing microbial contamination during corneal procurement.
designProspective interventional study.
methodsThis single-center study at the National Eye Bank of Taiwan included 830 corneas from 440 donors. Three povidone-iodine protocols were compared: soaking after draping (single-soaking method 1 [SSM1]), soaking before draping (SSM2), and soaking both before and after draping (double-soaking method [DSM]). Corneoscleral rim cultures were obtained post-procurement, with conjunctival cultures performed before and after each disinfection step in DSM. Grafts with gentamicin-resistant isolates were re-cultured after hypothermic storage. Donor and procurement variables were analyzed for association with contamination. The primary outcome was rim contamination; secondary outcomes included conjunctival culture positivity, persistence of resistant isolates, and associated risk factors.
resultsOf 830 corneas, 350 underwent SSM1, 364 SSM2, and 116 DSM. Rim contamination rates were similar (SSM1: 3.1%, SSM2: 3.0%, DSM: 2.6%; P > 0.05). In DSM, conjunctival positivity significantly decreased from 36.1% to 19.8% after double-soaking ( P < 0.001). Staphylococcus epidermidis was the most frequent isolate. One gentamicin-resistant strain was identified but did not persist after storage. No donor or procedural factors correlated with rim contamination, and no post-transplant infections occurred.
conclusionDouble-soaking significantly reduced conjunctival microbial load and showed a favorable trend toward reducing rim contamination. These findings support its use as a simple, low-risk strategy to lower ocular surface bioburden and enhance graft safety, while confirming the effectiveness of current disinfection and storage practices.
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.