Povidone-iodine induced post-surgical irritant contact dermatitis localized outside of the surgical incision area. Report of 27 cases and a literature review

The Use of Iodophor-Impregnated Drapes in Patients With Iodine-Related Allergies: A Case Series and Review of the Literature

Background

The use of iodophor-impregnated adhesive drapes have become almost universally incorporated into standard practice of arthroplasty draping technique. Iodine-related allergies in patients planned for joint replacement present a challenge in terms of the best course of action to minimize complications and optimize outcomes.

Methods

This is a retrospective case series of patients that received an iodophor-impregnated drape as part of draping for a total hip or knee arthroplasty at a single orthopaedic-specific hospital with documented iodine-related allergies. From 2015 to 2023, 9816 total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty cases were reviewed, and 135 were documented to have an iodine-related allergy for a prevalence of 1.38%. Intraoperative and postoperative records were reviewed to screen for an allergic reaction or wound healing issues that may have been related to an adverse reaction to the use of the iodophor-impregnated drape.

Results

Of the 135 patients, 43 had iodine listed as an allergy, 85 had shellfish, 20 had iodinated contrast media, and 3 had povidone iodine. Sixteen patients had a cluster of iodine-related allergies. There were no intraoperative reports of an allergic reaction to this drape. There were four superficial wound problems, none of which were documented to relate to an allergic dermatitis reaction, and none required further surgery.

Conclusions

Patients reporting iodine-related allergies were present in 1.38% of patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty in our series. We encountered no allergic reactions or adverse outcomes that could be attributed to the use of iodiphor impregnated drapes in these patients.

Biocides in the Hospital Environment: Application and Tolerance Development

Hospital-acquired infections are a rising problem with consequences for patients, hospitals, and health care workers. Biocides can be employed to prevent these infections, contributing to eliminate or reduce microorganisms' concentrations at the hospital environment. These antimicrobials belong to several groups, each with distinct characteristics that need to be taken into account in their selection for specific applications. Moreover, their activity is influenced by many factors, such as compound concentration and the presence of organic matter. This article aims to review some of the chemical biocides available for hospital infection control, as well as the main factors that influence their efficacy and promote susceptibility decreases, with the purpose to contribute for reducing misusage and consequently for preventing the development of resistance to these antimicrobials.

Irritant contact dermatitis due to povidone-iodine following a surgical intervention: An unusual case report

The most common day-to-day antiseptic preparation used before any surgery usually involves povidone-iodine. Any irritant reaction to it can be devastating for the patient's aspect and would raise the need for a preliminary investigation prior to going through any antiseptic preparation. In literature, very few cases were reported on irritant dermatitis with povidone-iodine in Indian setting. We present a case of an 18-year-old female presented with irritant contact dermatitis due to povidone-iodine following a surgical intervention.

Repurposing povidone-iodine to reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Accumulating data suggest antiviral effects of povidone-iodine against the Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus. This narrative review aims to examine the antiviral mechanisms of povidone-iodine, efficacy of povidone-iodine against the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and safety of povidone-iodine to human epithelial cells and thyroid function.

METHODS

We searched the electronic databases PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for articles containing the keywords "povidone-iodine", "SARS-CoV-2" and "COVID-19" from database inception till 3 June 2021.

RESULTS

Despite in vitro data supporting the anti-SARS-CoV-2 effects of povidone-iodine, findings from clinical studies revealed differences in treatment response depending on study settings (healthy vs. hospitalized individuals), treatment target (nasal vs. oral vs. pharynx), method of administration (oral rinse vs. gargle vs. throat spray) and choice of samples used to measure study endpoints (nasopharyngeal vs. saliva). One large-scale clinical trial demonstrated reduction in the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among participants who administered povidone-iodine 3 times daily during an active outbreak. Povidone-iodine is also used to disinfect the oro-pharyngeal space prior to dental or otolaryngology procedures. Although existing data suggest minimal impact of povidone-iodine on thyroid function, high-quality safety data are presently lacking.

CONCLUSIONS

Povidone-iodine application to the oropharyngeal space could complement existing non-pharmacological interventions to reduce SARS-CoV-2 infection especially in high exposure settings.Key messagesAccumulating data suggest antiviral effects of povidone-iodine against the SARS-CoV-2 virus.Findings from clinical studies reveal differences in treatment response depending on study settings, treatment target, method of administration and choice of samples used to measure study endpoints. One large-scale clinical trial observed reduction in the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among participants who administered povidone-iodine 3 times daily during an active outbreak.Povidone-iodine application to the oropharyngeal space could complement existing non-pharmacological interventions to reduce SARS-CoV-2 infection especially in high exposure settings.

Particle Design and Inhalation Delivery of Iodine for Upper Respiratory Tract Infection Therapy

Diseases caused by upper respiratory tract (URT) and pulmonary infections have been a serious threat to human health for millennia and lack of targeted effective therapeutic techniques. In this study, two kinds of cyclodextrin particles with typical particle shapes of nanocubes and microbars were synthesized through a facile process. Subsequently, the particles were used as carriers for loading and stabilizing iodine and characterizations were performed to demonstrate the loading mechanism. Next-generation impactor (NGI) experiments showed that iodine-loaded microbars (I₂@microbars) had a deposition rate of 79.75% in URT, while iodine-loaded nanocubes (I₂@nanocubes) were delivered to the deep lungs with a fine particle fraction (FPF) of 46.30%. Minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimal bactericidal concentration (MBC) indicated that the iodine-loaded nanocubes and microbars had similar bactericidal effect to povidone iodine solution. Cell viability studies and extracellular pro-inflammatory factor (TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-6) evaluations demonstrate noncytotoxic effects of the blank carriers and anti-inflammatory effects of iodine-loaded samples. The irritation of the rat pharynx by I₂@microbars was evaluated for the behavioral observations, body weight changes, histopathological studies, and TNF-α, IL-1β, and IL-6 levels in pharyngeal tissues. The results showed that I₂@microbars had no irritation to rat pharyngeal tissues at therapeutic doses. In conclusion, the present study provides novel treatment of URT infections via supramolecular cyclodextrin carriers for URT local therapy with iodine loading by a solvent-free method, which enhances the stability and reduces the inherent irritation without inhibiting their antimicrobial effects.

Comparison of hypochlorous acid and Povidone Iodine as a disinfectant in neonatal circumcision

INTRODUCTION

Neonatal circumcision is a procedure used worldwide which has very low rates of complication if conducted by a specialist. The present research aims to examine the wound healing effects of Hypochlorous Acid (HCOL) and Povidone Iodine (PI) used as a disinfectant prior to the procedure of circumcision and their antibacterial effectiveness.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

The findings of sixty infants subjected to neonatal circumcision at the Hisar Intercontinental Hospital between January 2021 and June 2021 were prospectively recorded. Based on the disinfectant used, the patients were divided into two group: Group 1 including 28 patients for whom HCOL was used as an antiseptic solution, and Group 2 including 32 patients to whom PI was administered.

RESULTS

Group 1 was formed of 28 patients while Group 2 included 32 patients. The mean ages of each group was 15.46 ± 10.58 (2-29) and 12.63 ± 10.00 (2-28) days, respectively. When the complications were examined individually, no significant difference was found between the groups. However, when all complications were analyzed collectively, it was determined that there was a significant difference, and the complication rate of Group 2 was greater (p = 0.037). In Group 2, the rate of edema and wound healing delay was significantly greater than that of Group 1 (p: 0.037 p: 0.036) (Table 1).

CONCLUSION

It was determined that HCOL is reliable to be used as a disinfectant prior to neonatal circumcision.

Evaluation of the Residual Disinfection Effects of Commonly Used Skin Disinfectants against Viruses: An Innovative Contact Transmission Control Method

Lasting disinfection effects, that is, the residual disinfection effects (RDEs), of skin-coated disinfectants have rarely been considered for infection control owing to the challenges involved in the accurate evaluation of RDEs. In this study, we constructed a new skin evaluation model and determined the RDEs of existing disinfectants against viruses. Our results showed that ethanol and isopropanol had no RDE, whereas povidone-iodine, chlorhexidine gluconate, and benzalkonium chloride (BAC) exhibited RDEs, with 10% povidone-iodine and 0.2% BAC showing particularly strong RDEs. The RDE of 0.2% BAC was strong enough to reduce the median survival times of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2, human coronavirus-OC43, and influenza virus from 670 to 5.2, 1300 to 12, and 120 to 4.2 min, respectively. Additionally, this strong RDE was maintained even 4 h after coating the skin. Clinical data also showed that the strong RDE of 0.2% BAC was maintained for more than 2 h. Thus, applying disinfectants with strong RDEs on the skin correlates with a reduction in virus survival time and appears to create a skin surface environment that is not conducive to virus survival. A prolonged reduction in virus survival decreases the contact transmission risk, thereby enabling stronger infection control.

Iatrogenic allergic contact dermatitis in the (peri)anal and genital area

BACKGROUND

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) from topical medication often occurs in occluded areas, for example, with wound treatment, but also in certain body locations, such as the anogenital area.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the demographics and specific lesion location of patients with ACD from topical drugs applied onto the (peri)anal/genital area, and to identify the respective causal topical pharmaceutical products and ingredients involved.

METHODS

From January 2000 to December 10, 2018, 532 patients were tested with the baseline series, sometimes with additional series, and the topical medication used along with the ingredients. The relevant data were extracted from our electronic databases developed in-house.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients (9%) out of 473 patients suffering from lesions in the (peri)anal/genital area had positive patch test results to topical drug preparations and/or their ingredients, sometimes in association with cosmetics for intimate hygiene. The most frequent sensitizing active principles were local anaesthetics and corticosteroids, while wool alcohols and to a minor extent benzoic acid were the most frequent culprits among the vehicle components and preservative agents, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The local conditions (eg, occlusion, sweating, moist) in the anogenital area may favour skin sensitization to topical medication used to treat various skin diseases.

Improving povidone-iodine and iodine preparations for patch testing

BACKGROUND

Allergy evaluation by patch testing with povidone-iodine (PVP-I) or iodine remains challenging, because current patch test preparations frequently lead to false-positive or irritant skin reactions.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate different preparations for iodine patch tests and to assess their clinical relevance with repeated open application tests (ROATs).

METHODS

We monocentrically analyzed 95 patients with suspected allergy to disinfectants in retrospect who underwent parallel iodine patch testing with four preparations: PVP-I 2% aq., 5% aq., 10% aq., and iodine 0.5% pet.

RESULTS

In 27 of 95 patients (28.4%), we found positive reactions to one of the four test preparations. After ROATs in 22 of these 27 positively tested individuals, only one patient was diagnosed with iodine allergy. In contrast, 31 of 95 patients (32.6%) showed irritant or questionable patch test reactions on day 2 (D2) and/or D3 and/or D7 to one or more test preparations. Testing with PVP-I 2% aq. resulted in the lowest number of doubtful skin reactions while detecting the single allergic patient.

CONCLUSION

PVP-I 2% aq. was found to be the optimal patch test preparation. In general, iodine allergy appears to be substantially overestimated, and positive patch test responses to iodine should prompt an urgent ROAT for confirmation before diagnosing iodine allergy.

Dermatologic reactions to disinfectant use during the COVID-19 pandemic

Infection preventive practice of using disinfectants against SARS-CoV-2 has become the new normal due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Although disinfectants may not be applied directly to the human body, it remains at high risk of exposure including close skin contact on disinfected surfaces or during handling. This dermal contact, on a regular basis, can induce hazardous skin reactions like irritation, inflammation, and burning in severe conditions. Disinfectants are germicide chemicals that can penetrate the skin and create skin reactions that are usually regarded as irritant and allergic contact dermatitis. More importantly, disinfectants can react with skin components (proteins and lipids) to facilitate their skin penetration and disrupt the skin barrier function. Whereas the antimicrobial actions of disinfectants are well understood, much less is known regarding their dermatologic reactions, including but not limited to irritation and hypersensitivity. We reviewed the skin reactions created by those disinfectants against SARS-CoV-2 approved by the European Chemical Agency and the US Environmental Protection Agency.

Allergic Contact Dermatitis to Operating Room Scrubs and Disinfectants

BACKGROUND

Both surgical personnel and patients undergoing procedures are exposed regularly to different antiseptic chemicals in various forms. Little is known about the ingredients in these antiseptics and the risk these products may provoke allergic contact dermatitis.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to identify and characterize common allergens in surgical scrubs and patient surgical cleansers that health care workers and surgical patients may encounter in the perioperative period.

METHODS

DailyMed website was searched using numerous terms for surgical disinfectants. Products used for health care worker handwashing/scrubbing or patient surgical cleansing/disinfecting were included. Each product's ingredients were recorded; those found on the 2017 American Contact Dermatitis Society (ACDS) Core Allergen Series were noted from each product.

CONCLUSIONS

A total of 1940 products were identified, of which 267 were included in the analysis. A total of 66.3% contained iodine, 25.8% contained chlorhexidine digluconate, and 2.6% contained chloroxylenol. Within the group analyzed, 1586 ingredients were identified. Of these, 241 were ACDS Core Series allergens. Most products contained a single ACDS allergen. There were significant differences in allergens based on product type and active ingredient, with iodine-containing products having the fewest number of allergens. The most common ACDS allergens found were cocamide diethanolamide (22.5%), fragrance (21.7%), lanolin (19.5%), propylene glycol (6.7%), alkyl glucosides (6.0%), and sorbic acid derivatives (5.6%).

Randomized clinical trial of single skin sterilization with a povidone-iodine applicator versus conventional skin sterilization in abdominal surgery

Background

The efficacy of widely used povidone–iodine applicators for skin sterilization in abdominal surgery is unclear. The aim of this trial was to evaluate whether sterilization with a povidone–iodine applicator was not inferior to a conventional sterilization method.

Methods

Patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery were assigned randomly to receive single sterilization with the applicator or conventional sterilization. The primary endpoint was wound infection rate. Secondary endpoints were rate of organ/space surgical‐site infection (SSI), adverse effects of povidone–iodine, amount of povidone–iodine used and total cost of sterilization.

Results

Of 498 patients eligible for the study between April 2015 and September 2017, 240 were assigned and analysed in the applicator group and 246 in the conventional group. Wound infection was detected in 16 patients (6·7 per cent) in the applicator group and 16 (6·5 per cent) in the conventional group (absolute difference 0·0016 (90 per cent c.i. −0·037 to 0·040) per cent; P = 0·014 for non‐inferiority). There was no difference between the groups in the organ/space SSI rate (11 patients (4·6 per cent) in the applicator group and 16 (6·5 per cent) in the conventional group. Both the amount of povidone–iodine used and the total cost of sterilization were higher in the conventional group than in the applicator group (median 76·7 versus 25 ml respectively, P < 0·001; median €7·0 versus €6·4, P < 0·001). Skin irritation was detected in three patients in the conventional group.

Conclusion

In abdominal surgery, this povidone–iodine applicator was not inferior to conventional sterilization in terms of the wound infection rate, and it is cheaper. Registration number: UMIN000018231 (http://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/).

Skin lesions over the pocket area that may mimic cardiac implantable electronic device infection: A case series

BACKGROUND

The early and correct diagnosis of cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections is critical given that early aggressive treatment with complete removal of the system along with antimicrobial therapy dramatically improves outcomes. Pocket infection manifested by local signs of inflammation is the most common form of CIED infections. Conditions mimicking pocket infection have been described in the literature. These include various types of malignancy and rarely allergic reactions/contact dermatitis to pacemaker compounds. We aimed to describe skin lesions and disorders over the pocket area that mimic CIED infection.

METHODS

We present a series of five cases with skin lesions that mimic pocket infection. We document these cases with corresponding photographs. Most of them have not been described in this setting.

RESULTS

We report the following cases of conditions that proved not to be CIED infection: One case of superficial cellulitis, one case of herpes zoster over the pocket area, one case of spontaneous bruising over the pocket a long time after implantation in a patient taking oral anticoagulation, and two cases of contact dermatitis due to prolonged postoperative application of povidone-iodine. All cases had favorable outcome after conservative treatment and no CIED infection was developed during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Clinicians should be aware of rare conditions that mimic CIED infection. Incorrect diagnosis of these disorders may falsely lead to CIED extraction.