Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Comparative cohort study reveals improved visual outcomes with adjunctive povidone-iodine irrigation during vitrectomy for endophthalmitis, indicating a safe and cost-effective intervention.
Purpose: To determine whether adjunctive 0.025% povidone-iodine irrigation during pars plana vitrectomy might improve ocular morbidity in infectious endophthalmitis compared to standard irrigation. Methods: Multicenter, retrospective, comparative cohort study (2019-2024) at four tertiary referral centers. 63 eyes from 63 patients with presumed infectious endophthalmitis requiring vitrectomy were included. Povidone-iodine group (n=32) received 0.025% povidone-iodine in balanced salt solution; control group (n=31) received standard irrigation. Primary outcome was visual acuity at 3 and 6 months. Secondary outcomes included reoperation rates and adverse events. Results: Groups were similar in age, presenting visual acuity (20/2890 vs 20/4000), and culture positivity (13/32 [40.6%] vs 13/31 [41.9%]). Povidone-iodine group was associated with better median visual acuity at 3 months (20/138 [0.84 logMAR] vs 20/3000 [2.21 logMAR], P=.017) and 6 months (20/60 [0.48 logMAR] vs 20/400 [1.34 logMAR], p=.010). Vision improved in 96.7% (29/30) vs 48.3% (14/29) at 6 months (p<0.001). Clinically meaningful improvement of at least 0.3 logMAR occurred in 80.0% of PI-treated eyes (24/30) and 41.4% of control eyes (12/29; p=.003). Reoperation rates were statistically similar, but slightly increased in the povidone-iodine group (28.1% vs 16.1%, p=.365). No ocular toxicity was attributed to povidone-iodine. Conclusion: Adjunctive 0.025% povidone-iodine irrigation during vitrectomy was associated with significantly improved visual outcomes without observed ocular toxicity. This simple, cost-effective intervention may benefit endophthalmitis management, though etiologic imbalances between groups limit attribution of this benefit to PI irrigation alone.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yuan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: