Ex vivo evaluation of the influence of pH on the ophthalmic safety, antibacterial efficacy and storage stability of povidone-iodine

Povidone-iodine in vitro antiseptic efficacy as a function of exposure duration, concentration, preparation, and length of storage

PURPOSE

Although 5% povidone-iodine (PVP-I) is frequently used as an ocular antiseptic agent, there is a lack of consensus regarding the effects of PVP-I concentration, storage after opening, and compounded preparation on PVP-I antisepsis. We performed a series of in-vitro experiments to determine the impact of these factors on PVP-I's inhibition of common causes of post-procedural eye infection.

METHODS

Inhibition of microorganism growth was measured in-vitro as a function of active PVP-I exposure time. In control experiments, PVP-I was inactivated before microorganism exposure. Tested PVP-I solutions varied in concentration (0.6%, 5%, or 10%), length of storage after opening (0, 7, or 30 days), and preparation (commercial vs.compounded from stock PI solution). Tested pathogens included S. epidermidis, S. viridans, P. aeruginosa, methicillin-resistant S. aureus, methicillin-sensitive S. aureus, and C. albicans.

RESULTS

PVP-I solutions inhibited all bacterial growth by 3 min and fungal growth by 15 s. Compared to 5% PVP-I, the 0.6% PVP-I was less effective in inhibiting S. viridans growth (200 ± 0 colonies vs. 7 ± 8 at 30 s, P = 0.0004; 183 ± 21 vs. 0 ± 0 at 1 min, P = 0.018), but more effective in inhibiting P. aeruginosa (30 ± 20 vs. 200 ± 0 at 15 s, P = 0.019). Compared to commercial and newly-opened PVP-I solutions, compounded preparations and solutions stored for 7 or 30 days after bottle opening either preserved or improved antiseptic efficacy against tested microorganisms.

CONCLUSIONS

Concentration of PVP-I solution affects antiseptic efficacy within 1 min of exposure, but all solutions performed equivalently at 3 min. In contrast to results of prior studies investigating dilute PVP-I, the 0.6% PVP-I did not demonstrate a uniformly equivalent or superior anti-septic effect. Compounded preparation and storage length after bottle opening did not decrease PVP-I antiseptic activity.

Iodine/soluble starch cryogel: An iodine-based antiseptic with instant water-solubility, improved stability, and potent bactericidal activity

Iodine (I2) as a broad-spectrum antiseptic has been widely used for treating bacterial infections. However, I2 has low water-solubility and sublimes under ambient conditions, which limits its practical antibacterial applications. The highly specific and sensitive reaction between I2 and starch discovered 200 years ago has been extensively applied in analytical chemistry, but the antibacterial activity of the I2-starch complex is rarely investigated. Herein, we develop a novel type of iodine-based antiseptics, iodine-soluble starch (I2-SS) cryogel, which can dissolve in water instantly and almost completely kill bacteria in 10 min at 2 μg/mL of I2. Although KI3 and the commercially available povidone‑iodine (I2-PVP) solutions show similar antibacterial efficacy, the high affinity of I2 to SS largely enhances the shelf stability of the I2-SS solution with ∼73 % I2 left after one-week storage at room temperature. In sharp contrast, ∼8.5 % and ∼2.5 % I2 are detected in KI3 and I2-PVP solutions, respectively. Mechanistic study reveals that the potent antibacterial effect of I2-SS originates from its attack on multiple bacterial targets. The outstanding antibacterial activity, capability of accelerating wound healing, and good biocompatibility of I2-SS are verified through further in vivo experiments. This work may promote the development of next-generation iodine-based antiseptics for clinical use.

In praise of povidone-iodine application in ophthalmology

Polyvinyl pyrrolidone or povidone-iodine (PVP-I) is a water-soluble complex formed by the combination of iodine and a water-soluble polymer, polyvinyl pyrrolidone. This complex exerts bactericidal, fungicidal, and virucidal action by gradually releasing free iodine at the site of application to react with pathogens. In ophthalmology, PVP-I is used as a disinfectant and antiseptic agent for preoperative preparation of the skin and mucous membranes and for treating contaminated wounds. PVP-I has been shown to reduce effectively the risk of endophthalmitis in various ocular procedures, including cataract surgery and intravitreal injections; however, it has also been used in the treatment of conjunctivitis, keratitis, and endophthalmitis, with promising results especially in low-resource situations. PVP-I has been associated with complications such as postoperative eye pain, persistent corneal epithelial defects, ocular inflammation, and an attendant risk of keratitis. In cases of poor PVP-I tolerance, applying PVP-I at lower concentrations or using alternative antiseptics such as chlorhexidine should be considered. We provide an update on the efficacy of PVP-I in the prophylaxis and treatment of conjunctivitis, keratitis, and endophthalmitis and a comprehensive analysis of the current literature regarding the use of PVP-I in the management of these ocular conditions. Also, PVP-I-related adverse effects and toxicities and its alternatives are discussed. The goal is to present a thorough evaluation of the available evidence and to offer practical recommendations for clinicians regarding the therapeutic usage of PVP-I in ophthalmology.

Efficacy of a New Alcohol-Free Organic Acid-Based Hand Sanitizer against Foodborne Pathogens

In light of the global health crisis triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic, numerous experts have deemed the utilization of hand sanitizers imperative as a precautionary measure against the virus. Consequently, the demand for hand sanitizers has experienced a substantial surge. Since the beginning of 2020, the utilization of alcohol-free hand sanitizers has been increasingly favored due to the potential risks associated with alcohol poisoning, flammability, as well as the adverse effects on skin lipid dissolution, dehydration, and sebum reduction, which can lead to severe cases of eczema and norovirus infections. In this study, we developed an aqueous hand sanitizer that does not contain alcohol. The sanitizer consists of naturally occurring, food-grade organic acids, including lactic, citric, and azelaic acids. Additionally, food-grade ammonium sulfate and a small amount of povidone-iodine (PVPI) were included in the formulation to create a synergistic and potent antibacterial effect. The effectiveness of the hand sanitizer was evaluated against four common foodborne pathogens, namely Clostridium botulinum, Escherichia coli, Listeria monocytogenes, and Staphylococcus aureus, via in vitro testing. The organic acids exhibited a synergistic inhibitory function, resulting in a 3-log reduction in CFU/mL. Furthermore, the presence of povidone-iodine and ammonium sulfate enhanced their antibacterial effect, leading to a 4-log reduction in CFU/mL. The hand sanitizer solution remained stable even after 60 days of storage. During this period, the detection of additional triiodide (I3-) ions occurred, which have the ability to release broad-spectrum molecular iodine upon penetrating the cell walls. This alcohol-free hand sanitizer may offer extended protection and is anticipated to be gentle on the skin. This is attributed to the presence of citric and lactic acids, which possess cosmetic properties that soften and smoothen the skin, along with antioxidant properties.

Povidone-Iodine Adverse Effects and Alternatives for Ocular Procedures

Purpose: Povidone-iodine (PVI), also known as Betadine, is a widely used antiseptic agent used in several fields of medicine. In ophthalmology, it is applied as a preoperative antiseptic to prevent infectious complications that can result from surgical procedures. PVI's safety and efficacy have been extensively studied and represented in the literature; however, the incidence of adverse effects has been reported in conjunction. The aim of this paper is to compile information regarding PVIs use, safety profile, adverse effects, and possible alternatives through a review of the existing literature. Methods: Literature was compiled utilizing the database PubMed and Google Scholar using specified keywords with a total of 86 reviewed articles, after excluding search results that did not meet the inclusion criteria. Results: While the allergic potential to PVI is a highly contested topic, there are several nonallergic adverse effects of PVI that should not be overlooked. These effects include chemical burn, cytotoxic effects, and general patient discomfort. In light of these adverse effects, alternatives to PVI may be considered. However, there has been little research identifying feasible alternatives in preoperative intraocular procedures. Alternatives including chlorhexidine, polyhexamethylene biguanide (polyhexanide), and octenidine were identified as potential substitutes for PVI. Conclusions: Further study is needed to provide robust evidence regarding the efficacy profiles of these alternatives in comparison with PVI and to demonstrate comparable tolerance to PVI in intraocular procedures.

Povidone-Iodine Fails to Eradicate Chronic Suppurative Otitis Media and Demonstrates Ototoxic Risk in Mice

HYPOTHESIS

Commercially available povidone-iodine solution can eliminate biofilms and persister cells rapidly in in vivo achievable concentrations without inducing ototoxicity.

BACKGROUND

Chronic suppurative otitis media (CSOM) is a substantial global problem. Current treatment options often induce a temporary remission without leading to a permanent cessation of symptoms secondary to the treatments' inability to eliminate persister cells. Povidone-iodine has been shown to be able to clear biofilm and planktonic cells in in vitro assays, but there are reports of ototoxic effects limiting its clinical utility.

METHODS

Bacterial and biofilm growth with quantification by spectrophotomer, murine auditory brainstem response (ABR), and distortion product otoacoustic emissions, immunohistochemistry, in vivo povidone-iodine treatment of murine CSOM, persister cell assay.

RESULTS

Commercially available 10% povidone-iodine solution is able to completely eradicate multiple clinical strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus in vitro with 10 minutes of exposure. Mice that have received a transtympanic injection of 1% povidone-iodine solution did not have significantly different auditory brainstem response or distortion product otoacoustic emission results compared with the control. Mice that received a povidone-iodine scrub or 10% povidone-iodine solution had significantly worsened hearing (25- and 13-dB increase in threshold, respectively; p < 0.05). In vivo CSOM infection recurred in all mice after the completion of treatment with 10% povidone-iodine solution, and there was no improvement in the bacterial load after treatment, indicating in vivo failure of therapy.

CONCLUSION

Povidone-iodine solution is effective at eliminating biofilm and persister cells in vitro at in vivo achievable concentrations but fails in vivo most likely because of kinetics of distribution in vivo. Even if drug distribution could be improved, the therapeutic window is likely to be too small given that the diluted solution does not have ototoxic potential, whereas while the scrub variant, which contains detergents, and the undiluted solution are ototoxic after a single treatment.