povidone-iodine
Regulatory sources consulted
Approved indications
- Antiseptic washing of the external vaginal area and relief of symptoms associated with vaginal infections.
Contraindications
Absolute
- Hypersensitivity to povidone-iodine or excipients.
- Thyroid disorder or use before, during, or after radioactive iodine.
- Concomitant use of mercury-containing products.
- Pregnancy and children under 1 year.
Clinical warnings
- Major warning · Stop for irritation, contact dermatitis, or hypersensitivity. Avoid prolonged or extensive use, especially with thyroid disease; thyroid-function monitoring may be needed. — CIMA/AEMPS, ficha técnica 36341
Drug interactions
- HighMercury, silver, hydrogen peroxide, taurolidine, or enzyme preparations
Mechanism: They may inactivate the antiseptic or form compounds that damage skin.
Recommendation: Do not use concomitantly.
CIMA/AEMPS, ficha técnica 36341https://cima.aemps.es/cima/dochtml/ft/36341/FT_36341.html
- ModerateLithium
Mechanism: Continuous use may increase the risk of thyroid dysfunction.
Recommendation: Avoid continuous use and monitor thyroid function if essential.
CIMA/AEMPS, ficha técnica 36341https://cima.aemps.es/cima/dochtml/ft/36341/FT_36341.html
Adverse events
Rare but serious
Anaphylaxis or angioedema · Severe thyroid dysfunction · Acute kidney failure after substantial absorption
Pregnancy and lactation
Contraindicated during pregnancy. During breastfeeding, avoid unless maternal benefit justifies neonatal risk and no safer alternative exists; iodine passes into milk.
Recent literature (PubMed)
Approximately 0.5% to 3% of patients undergoing surgery will experience infection at or adjacent to the surgical incision site. Compared with patients undergoing surgery who do not have a surgical site infection, those with a surgical site infection are hospitalized approximately 7 to 11 days longer. Most surgical site infections can be prevented if appropriate strategies are implemented. These infections are typically caused when bacteria from the patient's endogenous flora are inoculated into the surgical site at the time of surgery. Development of an infection depends on various factors such as the health of the patient's immune system, presence of foreign material, degree of bacterial wound contamination, and use of antibiotic prophylaxis. Although numerous strategies are recommended by international organizations to decrease surgical site infection, only 6 general strategies are supported by randomized trials. Interventions that are associated with lower rates of infection include avoiding razors for hair removal (4.4% with razors vs 2.5% with clippers); decolonization with intranasal antistaphylococcal agents and antistaphylococcal skin antiseptics for high-risk procedures (0.8% with decolonization vs 2% without); use of chlorhexidine gluconate and alcohol-based skin preparation (4.0% with chlorhexidine gluconate plus alcohol vs 6.5% with povidone iodine plus alcohol); maintaining normothermia with active warming such as warmed intravenous fluids, skin warming, and warm forced air to keep the body temperature warmer than 36 °C (4.7% with active warming vs 13% without); perioperative glycemic control (9.4% with glucose <150 mg/dL vs 16% with glucose >150 mg/dL); and use of negative pressure wound therapy (9.7% with vs 15% without). Guidelines recommend appropriate dosing, timing, and choice of preoperative parenteral antimicrobial prophylaxis. Surgical site infections affect approximately 0.5% to 3% of patients undergoing surgery and are associated with longer
Preoperative skin antisepsis is an established procedure to prevent surgical site infections (SSIs). The choice of antiseptic agent, povidone iodine or chlorhexidine gluconate, remains debated. To determine whether povidone iodine in alcohol is noninferior to chlorhexidine gluconate in alcohol to prevent SSIs after cardiac or abdominal surgery. Multicenter, cluster-randomized, investigator-masked, crossover, noninferiority trial; 4403 patients undergoing cardiac or abdominal surgery in 3 tertiary care hospitals in Switzerland between September 2018 and March 2020 were assessed and 3360 patients were enrolled (cardiac, n = 2187 [65%]; abdominal, n = 1173 [35%]). The last follow-up was on July 1, 2020. Over 18 consecutive months, study sites were randomly assigned each month to either use povidone iodine or chlorhexidine gluconate, each formulated in alcohol. Disinfectants and skin application processes were standardized and followed published protocols. Primary outcome was SSI within 30 days after abdominal surgery and within 1 year after cardiac surgery, using definitions from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Healthcare Safety Network. A noninferiority margin of 2.5% was used. Secondary outcomes included SSIs stratified by depth of infection and type of surgery. A total of 1598 patients (26 cluster periods) were randomly assigned to receive povidone iodine vs 1762 patients (26 cluster periods) to chlorhexidine gluconate. Mean (SD) age of patients was 65.0 years (39.0-79.0) in the povidone iodine group and 65.0 years (41.0-78.0) in the chlorhexidine gluconate group. Patients were 32.7% and 33.9% female in the povidone iodine and chlorhexidine gluconate groups, respectively. SSIs were identified in 80 patients (5.1%) in the povidone iodine group vs 97 (5.5%) in the chlorhexidine gluconate group, a difference of 0.4% (95% CI, -1.1% to 2.0%) with the lower limit of the CI not exceeding the predefined noninferiority margin of -2.5%; results we
This narrative literature review is the first in a 6-section supplement on the role of mouthwashes in oral care. This introduction briefly summarises current knowledge on antimicrobial mechanisms, relating to some of the most common over-the-counter mouthwash products available worldwide: chlorhexidine, hydrogen peroxide, cetylpyridinium chloride, povidone iodine, and essential oils. The aim of this first article is to describe how mouthwashes "kill" pathogenic microbes when used adjunctively and thus provide a basis for their widespread use to manage key oral diseases, namely caries, gingivitis, and periodontal disease. This article therefore sets the scene for subsequent, more detailed exploration of mouthwashes regarding their clinical effectiveness, impact on the oral microbiome, and possible effects on systemic health as well as natural alternatives and future directions. Other than the clinical effectiveness (for certain agents) of mouthwashes, on many topics there remains insufficient evidence for systematic review or formulation of robust national guidelines. The supplement, therefore, compiled by an international task team, is aimed at general dental practitioners across the globe, as an easy-to-read guide for helping to advise patients on mouthwash use based on the current best available evidence.
Preoperative preparation for cesarean delivery is a multistep approach for which protocols should exist at each hospital system. These protocols should be guided by the findings of this review. The interventions reviewed and recommendations made for this review have a common goal of decreasing maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality related to cesarean delivery. The preoperative period starts before the patient's arrival to the hospital and ends immediately before skin incision. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends showering with either soap or an antiseptic solution at least the night before a procedure. Skin cleansing in addition to this has not been shown to further decrease rates of infection. Hair removal at the cesarean skin incision site is not necessary, but if preferred by the surgical team then clipping or depilatory creams should be used rather than shaving. Preoperative enema is not recommended. A clear liquid diet may be ingested up to 2 hours before and a light meal up to 6 hours before cesarean delivery. Consider giving a preoperative carbohydrate drink to nondiabetic patients up to 2 hours before planned cesarean delivery. Weight-based intravenous cefazolin is recommended 60 minutes before skin incision: 1-2 g intravenous for patients without obesity and 2 g for patients with obesity or weight ≥80 kg. Adjunctive azithromycin 500 mg intravenous is recommended for patients with labor or rupture of membranes. Preoperative gabapentin can be considered as a way to decrease pain scores with movement in the postoperative period. Tranexamic acid (1 g in 10-20 mL of saline or 10 mg/kg intravenous) is recommended prophylactically for patients at high risk of postpartum hemorrhage and can be considered in all patients. Routine use of mechanical venous thromboembolism prophylaxis is recommended preoperatively and is to be continued until the patient is ambulatory. Music and active warming of the patient, and adequate operating room tem
Issues arising in wound healing are very common, and chronic wound infections affect approximately 1.5% of the population. The main substances used in wound washing, cleansing and treatment are antiseptics. Today, there are many compounds with a known antiseptic activity. Older antiseptics (e.g., boric acid, ethacridine lactate, potassium permanganate, hydrogen peroxide, iodoform, iodine and dyes) are not recommended for wound treatment due to a number of disadvantages. According to the newest guidelines of the Polish Society for Wound Treatment and the German Consensus on Wound Antisepsis, only the following antiseptics should be taken into account for wound treatment: octenidine (OCT), polihexanide (PHMB), povidone-iodine (PVP-I), sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) and nanosilver. This article provides an overview of the five antiseptics mentioned above, their chemical properties, wound applications, side effects and safety.