Safety and tolerability of a one-time, in-office administration of 5% povidone-iodine in the treatment of adenoviral conjunctivitis: The Reducing Adenoviral Patient Infected Days (RAPID) study

Natural history of adenoviral conjunctivitis in a US-based population: Viral load, signs, and symptoms

PURPOSE

To report the clinical signs, symptoms, and viral clearance in individuals in the United States with adenoviral conjunctivitis (Ad-Cs).

METHODS

Individuals ≥ 18 years presenting within 4 days of symptoms of Ad-Cs who met eligibility criteria and tested positive with both point-of-care immunoassay antigen and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) testing were enrolled. Patient-reported symptoms, clinician-graded signs, and qPCR viral titers were collected at baseline, days 1-2, 4 (days 3-5), 7 (days 6-10), 14 (days 11-17) and 21 (days 18-21).

RESULTS

There was no detectable viral titers by the day 14 visit in 6/8 patients. By day 21, there was no detectable viral titers in the 7 participants who completed the visit; however, signs and symptoms persisted including: blurry vision (5/7), discomfort (2/7) or redness (1/7). Masked clinicians also noted conjunctival redness (4/7), follicular conjunctivitis (4/7) and bulbar edema (3/7).

CONCLUSION

Many patient-reported symptoms and clinical signs persist after viral titers are no longer detectable by qPCR. Using clinical signs and symptoms to determine quarantine duration may result in patients being furloughed longer than the time that the patient is infectious.

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.

The effect of povidone-iodine 2% eye drops in the treatment of adenoviral keratoconjunctivitis

BACKGROUND

Keratoconjunctivitis is one of the most common pathologies worldwide, caused by several infectious and noninfectious factors. This study aimed to determine the effect of povidone-iodine 2% eye drops in treating adenoviral keratoconjunctivitis.

METHODS

This analytic cross-sectional study was conducted on patients referred to Farabi Eye Hospital Records of patients with adenoviral keratoconjunctivitis, more than 12 years of age, and no allergy to iodine who were treated by povidone-iodine 2% eye drops four times a day were assessed. Data included demographic characteristics, family history of adenoviral keratoconjunctivitis, follicular conjunctivitis, petechial conjunctival hemorrhages, periauricular lymphadenopathy, and the presence of conjunctival pseudomembrane were collected from the records. Discharge decrease, injection decrease, swelling decrease, pseudomembrane formation, periauricular lymphadenopathy, and subepithelial infiltration on the 7^thday of assessment by physical examination were reported.

RESULTS

Patients with a mean (±standard deviation) age of 33.77 (11.01) years were assessed. At the baseline, 95 (99.0%) follicular conjunctivitis, 94 (97.9%) petechial conjunctival hemorrhages, 29 (30.2%) periauricular lymphadenopathy, and 5 (5.2%) conjunctival pseudomembrane were recorded. On the 7^thday of treatment, the discharge decreased in 92.7% of patients, and the injection decreased in 90.6%. The swelling decrease was also detected in 79.2% of patients. Subepithelial infiltration was only seen in 21.9% of the study population. Results showed that 2.1% of patients had periauricular lymphadenopathy, and only 13 out of 96 patients (13.5%) had pseudomembrane formation after 7 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the safety, availability, and tolerability of povidone-iodine and its promising effects on patients with adenoviral keratoconjunctivitis, further clinical trials assessing the impact of this drug in a longer duration of follow-up can be recommended.

The relationship between clinical findings and viral load in Adenoviral Keratoconjunctivitis

The study aimed to evaluate the relationship between clinical findings and viral load in adenoviral keratoconjunctivitis (Ad-Kc). In this cross-sectional study, 30 eyes of 30 patients with Ad-Kc were enrolled. The real-time polymerase chain reaction was performed to detect and quantify adenovirus in all samples. The patient groups were divided into three subgroups according to baseline viral loads (<10⁷, 10⁷-10⁸, >10⁸ HAdV copies/ml). The follow-up duration, HAdV DNA copy number, treatment regimen, and detailed clinical findings including uncorrected visual acuity, eyelid edema, conjunctival hyperemia, chemosis, follicular reaction, corneal involvement, conjunctival pseudomembrane, and subepithelial infiltrates (SEIs) were recorded. The study showed that a high initial viral load was associated with the development of SEIs and pseudomembrane formation (p<0.05). Clinical findings and ocular complications of Ad-Kc were found similar in treatment groups at the final visit (p>0.05). Our results showed that a high initial viral load in Ad-Kc may be predictive of inflammatory sequelae. Determination of the initial viral load in Ad-Kc may be helpful to better understand the clinical course of the disease and prevent complications.

Evaluation of knowledge, attitude, and behaviour of ophthalmologists about adenoviral conjunctivitis transmission and treatment : An online survey for Turkish ophthalmologists

PURPOSE

To determine the prevalence of adenoviral conjunctivitis in Turkish ophthalmologists, to provide an overview of the treatment and prophylaxis of adenoviral conjunctivitis, and to analyze the data in the context of evidence-based treatment recommendations.

METHODS

An online questionnaire consisting of 20 multiple-choice questions about the characteristics of the respondents, the individual adenoviral conjunctivitis history of the ophthalmologists, their practice's approaches, and prescription preferences were emailed to Turkish ophthalmologists.

RESULTS

The survey was emailed to 500 ophthalmologists; 45% of them returned the questionnaire. According to the responses, the history of adenoviral conjunctivitis infections was positive in 46.7% (n: 120), recurrent attack prevalence was 16.2% in ophthalmologists. Lubricants (67.6%) are the most preferred first-line treatment options for adenoviral conjunctivitis, followed by povidone-iodine (59.6%), topical antibiotics (51.1%), topical antivirals (29.3%), topical corticosteroids (26.7%), and topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents (19.6%). A total of 98.2% preferred to dismiss infected patients. The preferred prophylaxis options were frequent hand washing/use of gloves (97.8%), disinfection of medical devices (95.1%), isolation of infected patients (79.1%), hand hygiene with gemicides (58.7%). The percentage of single-dose eye drop selection was 46.2.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this survey showed that most Turkish ophthalmologists generally follow international guidelines for the treatment of adenoviral conjunctivitis. The treatment algorithm is still controversial, so ophthalmologists should be aware of treatment guideline updates in line with evidence-based recommendations. Having sufficient knowledge of the basic characteristics of viruses is important to control the spread of the disease.

Topical pharmacologic interventions versus placebo for epidemic keratoconjunctivitis

BACKGROUND

Viruses cause about 80% of all cases of acute conjunctivitis. Human adenoviruses are believed to account for 65% to 90% of cases of viral conjunctivitis, or 20% to 75% of all causes of infectious keratoconjunctivitis worldwide. Epidemic keratoconjunctivitis (EKC) is a highly contagious subset of adenoviral conjunctivitis that has been associated with large outbreaks at military installations and at medical facilities. It is accompanied by severe conjunctival inflammation, watery discharge, and light sensitivity, and can lead to chronic complications such as corneal and conjunctival scarring with discomfort and poor quality of vision. Due to a lack of consensus on the efficacy of any pharmacotherapy to alter the clinical course of EKC, no standard of care exists, therefore many clinicians offer only supportive care.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of topical pharmacological therapies versus placebo, an active control, or no treatment for adults with EKC.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register; 2021, Issue 4); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences database (LILACS); ClinicalTrials.gov; and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), with no restrictions on language or year of publication. The date of the last search was 27 April 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials in which antiseptic agents, virustatic agents, or topical immune-modulating therapy was compared with placebo, an active control, or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 10 studies conducted in Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and North Africa with a total of 892 participants who were treated for 7 days to 6 months and followed for 7 days up to 1.5 years. Study characteristics and risk of bias In most studies participants were predominantly men (range: 44% to 90%), with an age range from 9 to 82 years. Three studies reported information on trial registration, but we found no published study protocol. The majority of trials had small sample sizes, ranging from 18 to 90 participants enrolled per study; the only exception was a trial that enrolled 350 participants. We judged most studies to be at high or unclear risk of bias across risk of bias domains. Findings We included 10 studies of 892 EKC participants and estimated combined intervention effects in analyses stratified by steroid-containing control treatment or artificial tears. Six trials contributed to the comparisons of topical interventions (povidone-iodine [PVP-I], trifluridine, ganciclovir, dexamethasone plus neomycin) with artificial tears (or saline). Very low certainty evidence from two trials comparing trifluridine or ganciclovir with artificial tears showed inconsistent effects on shortening the mean duration of cardinal symptoms or signs of EKC. Low certainty evidence based on two studies (409 participants) indicated that participants treated with PVP-I alone more often experienced resolution of symptoms (risk ratio (RR) 1.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07 to 1.24) and signs (RR 3.19, 95% CI 2.29 to 4.45) during the first week of treatment compared with those treated with artificial tears. Very low certainty evidence from two studies (77 participants) suggested that PVP-I or ganciclovir prevented the development of subepithelial infiltrates (SEI) when compared with artificial tears within 30 days of treatment (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.56). Four studies compared topical interventions (tacrolimus, cyclosporin A [CsA], trifluridine, PVP-I + dexamethasone) with topical steroids, and one trial compared fluorometholone (FML) plus polyvinyl alcohol iodine (PVA-I) with FML plus levofloxacin. Evidence from one trial showed that more eyes receiving PVP-I 1.0% plus dexamethasone 0.1% had symptoms resolved by day seven compared with those receiving dexamethasone alone (RR 9.00, 95% CI 1.23 to 66.05; 52 eyes). In two trials, fewer eyes treated with PVP-I or PVA-I plus steroid developed SEI within 15 days of treatment compared with steroid alone or steroid plus levofloxacin (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.55; 69 eyes). One study found that CsA was no more effective than steroid for resolving SEI within four weeks of treatment (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.06; N = 88). The evidence from trials comparing topical interventions with steroids was overall of very low level certainty. Adverse effects Antiviral or antimicrobial agents plus steroid did not differ from artificial tears in terms of ocular discomfort upon instillation (RR 9.23, 95% CI 0.61 to 140.67; N = 19). CsA and tacrolimus eye drops were associated with more cases of severe ocular discomfort, and sometimes intolerance, when compared with steroids (RR 4.64, 95% CI 1.15 to 18.71; 2 studies; N = 141). Compared with steroids, tacrolimus did not increase the risk of elevated intraocular pressure (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0 to 1.13; 1 study; N = 80), while trifluridine conferred no additional risk compared to tear substitute (RR 5.50, 95% CI 0.31 to 96.49; 1 study; N = 97). Overall, bacterial superinfection was rare (one in 23 CsA users) and not associated with use of the intervention steroid (RR 3.63, 95% CI 0.15 to 84.98; N = 51). The evidence for all estimates was of low or very low certainty.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for the seven specified outcomes was of low or very low certainty due to imprecision and high risk of bias. The evidence that antiviral agents shorten the duration of symptoms or signs when compared with artificial tears was inconclusive. Low certainty evidence suggests that PVP-I alone resolves signs and symptoms by seven days relative to artificial tears. PVP-I or PVA-I, alone or with steroid, is associated with lower risks of SEI development than artificial tears or steroid (very low certainty evidence). The currently available evidence is insufficient to determine whether any of the evaluated interventions confers an advantage over steroids or artificial tears with respect to virus eradication or its spread to initially uninvolved fellow eyes. Future updates of this review should provide evidence of high-level certainty from trials with larger sample sizes, enrollment of participants with similar durations of signs and symptoms, and validated methods to assess short- and long-term outcomes.

Efficacy of a Single Administration of 5% Povidone-Iodine in the Treatment of Adenoviral Conjunctivitis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of a single, in-office administration of 5% povidone-iodine (PVP-I) compared to artificial tears (AT) for adenoviral conjunctivitis (Ad-Cs).

DESIGN

Double-masked pilot randomized trial.

METHODS

Patients presenting with presumed adenoviral conjunctivitis were screened at 9 U.S. clinics.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

≥18 years of age, symptoms ≤4 days, and a positive AdenoPlus test.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

thyroid disease, iodine allergy, recent ocular surgery, and ocular findings inconsistent with early-stage Ad-Cs. Randomization was to a single administration of 5% PVP-I or AT in 1 eye and examinations on days 1-2, 4, 7, 14, and 21 with conjunctival swabs taken at each visit for quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Primary outcome was percent reduction from peak viral load. Secondary outcomes were improvement in clinical signs and symptoms.

RESULTS

Of 56 patients randomized, 28 had detectable viral titers at baseline. Day 4 posttreatment, viral titers in the 5% PVP-I and AT groups were 2.5% ± 2.7% and 14.4% ± 10.5% of peak, respectively (P = .020). Severity of participant-reported tearing, lid swelling, and redness as well as clinician-graded mucoid discharge, bulbar redness, and bulbar edema were lower in the 5% PVP-I group than AT group on day 4 (P < .05). After day 4, viral titers and severity of signs and symptoms decreased markedly in both groups and no differences between groups were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Pilot data suggest a single, in-office administration of 5% PVP-I could reduce viral load and hasten improvement of clinical signs and symptoms in patients with Ad-Cs.

Success of Masking 5% Povidone-Iodine Treatment: The Reducing Adenoviral Patient Infected Days Study

SIGNIFICANCE

The effectiveness of masking is rarely evaluated or reported in single- or double-masked clinical trials. Knowledge of treatment assignment by participants and clinicians can bias the assessment of treatment efficacy.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of masking in a double-masked trial of 5% povidone-iodine for the treatment of adenoviral conjunctivitis.

METHODS

The Reducing Adenoviral Patient Infected Days study is a double-masked, randomized trial comparing a one-time, in-office administration of 5% povidone-iodine with artificial tears for the treatment of adenoviral conjunctivitis. Masking was assessed by asking participants and masked clinicians at designated time points if they believed the treatment administered was povidone-iodine or artificial tears, or if they were unsure. Adequacy of masking was quantified using a modified Bang Blinding Index.

RESULTS

Immediately after treatment, 34% of participants who received povidone-iodine and 69% of those who received artificial tears guessed incorrectly or were unsure of their treatment (modified Bang Indices of 0.31 and -0.38, respectively). On day 4, 38% of the povidone-iodine participants and 52% of the artificial tear participants guessed incorrectly or were unsure of their treatment (modified Bang Indices of 0.24 and -0.05, respectively), indicating adequate and ideal masking. On days 1, 4, 7, 14, and 21, masked clinicians guessed incorrectly or were unsure of treatment in 53%, 50%, 40%, 39%, and 42% among povidone-iodine participants compared with 44%, 35%, 38%, 35%, and 39% among artificial tears participants, respectively. The modified Bang Indices for clinician masking in the povidone-iodine group ranged from -0.05 to 0.25 and from 0.13 to 0.29 in the artificial tears group.

CONCLUSIONS

Masking of participants and clinicians was adequate. Successful masking increases confidence that subjective measurements are not biased. We recommend quantitative assessment and reporting the effectiveness of masking in ophthalmic clinical trials.

Topical Ocular Povidone-Iodine as an Adjunctive Preventative Practice in the Era of COVID-19

ABSTRACT

Ophthalmologists and patients have an inherent increased risk for transmission of SARS-CoV-2. The human ocular surface expresses receptors and enzymes facilitating transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Personal protective equipment alone provides incomplete protection. Adjunctive topical ocular, nasal, and oral antisepsis with povidone iodine bolsters personal protective equipment in prevention of provider-patient transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in ophthalmology.

Povidone iodine for the treatment of adenoviral conjunctivitis

Adenoviral conjunctivitis is the most common cause of ocular viral infection in the world, but currently has no approved therapeutic treatments. The antiseptic povidone-iodine (PVP-I) has been used as an off-label treatment for the condition, but high-quality evidence for its use is limited. This paper aims to review the literature surrounding the use of PVP-I in the management of adenoviral conjunctivitis. Unfortunately, treatment regimens, inclusion criteria, outcome measures, and review periods vary widely between studies, making direct comparisons between outcomes difficult. The majority of studies investigate daily instillation of 0.4 to 2.0% PVP-I rather than one-time instillation of PVP-I as has been used anecdotally in practice. In addition, only one treatment arm investigates daily PVP-I alone, with no significant difference in the duration of disease or clinical outcome compared to placebo. All other treatment arms investigate PVP-I in combination with dexamethasone which generally improve outcomes. Tolerability of PVP-I is generally good for low concentrations <1.0%, but efficacy of treatment is generally reported to be concentration dependent. Future research should investigate the optimal concentration, dosing regimen and role of each agent in combination treatment and aim to use laboratory techniques to improve diagnosis and provide quantifiable outcomes.

Virucidal benefits of povidone-iodine use on the ocular surface: a review

Povidone-iodine (PVI) preparations are well known for their microbicidal effect. In ophthalmology, PVI is commonly used to sterilise the ocular surface prior to surgical procedures. It is also used uncommonly as treatment for adenoviral conjunctivitis, yet the virucidal benefits of PVI have not been clearly documented in existing clinical management guidelines for ocular surface conditions. The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus, has challenged traditional healthcare systems. The morbidity and mortality of this highly contagious disease have resulted in fatalities among healthcare workers, including ophthalmologists. The SARS-CoV-2 virus has been identified on conjunctival testing, a potential source of contagious infection which may be unrecognised in asymptomatic carriers. Concern has been raised that ocular procedures may be ‘aerosol-generating’ and the additional wearing of personal protective equipment has been recommended to protect operating theatre staff. This literature review demonstrates that PVI has a broad virucidal activity, including against coronaviruses. It is already used perioperatively as standard of ophthalmic care and has been shown clinically to be effective against adenoviruses on the ocular surface. The current surgical practice of application of 5%–10% PVI applied periocularly for 3 min seems to provide an adequate effective reduction in the patient’s ocular surface viral load. The virucidal benefits of routine PVI use should be included in ophthalmology guidelines regarding safe ocular surgery protocols.