Clearance of topically-applied PVP-iodine as a solution or gel in periodontal pockets in men

Abstract

The application of PVP-iodine gel in periodontal pockets allows a prolonged remnant effect as compared to that of the solution formula.

Iodine release and antibacterial effects of a wound paste combined with PVP-iodine powder and/or solution in vitro

“…Accordingly our hypothesis has been confirmed. In a recent clinical study, the clearance of PVP-iodine applied as a gel or solution was investigated in periodontal pockets [19]. The mean concentrations of the gel and solution, however, were much lower as compared to the results of the present study.…”

“…The mean concentrations of the gel and solution were small, accounting for 6.14 µg/ml and 4.44 µg/ml (1 min; ≤ 0.028), 3.20 µg/ml and 1.44 µg/ml (5 min; ≥ 0.126), 0.69 µg/ml and 0.23 µg/ml (15 min; p ≤ 0.019), respectively. Not surprisingly, in the pockets with previous debridement, the mean concentration even decreased significantly due to bleeding from the pocket [19]. Therefore, the ointment may offer some advantages over a solution, but improved pharmaceutical forms should be envisaged.…”

Combination of ultrasonic decontamination, soft tissue curettage, and submucosal air polishing with povidone‐iodine application for non‐surgical therapy of peri‐implantitis: 12‐month clinical outcomes

“…Considering the restricted accessibility of peri‐implant pockets and the pronounced inflammatory cell infiltrate compared with periodontitis, results of the non‐surgical treatment of peri‐implantitis might be improved by: 1) removal of the peri‐implant biofilm by a combination of different methods of mechanical debridement; 2) reduction of inflammatory infiltrate by soft tissue curettage (STC); and 3) an adjuvant antiseptic therapy. Thereby, povidone‐iodine might be a promising alternative to previously reported antiseptics with several advantages: povidone‐iodine has a broad antibacterial spectrum, including Gram‐positive and Gram‐negative bacteria and Staphylococci spp., but also Candida albicans and several anaerobic periodontal bacteria (in particular Porphyromonas gingivalis , Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans , and Fusobacterium nucleatum ) . Further, it has low cost and a very limited risk for developing bacterial resistance .…”

“…Further, it has low cost and a very limited risk for developing bacterial resistance . For non‐surgical therapy of periodontitis, clinical and microbial benefits for the adjuvant application of povidone‐iodine have already been documented, whereas the antimicrobial potential for peri‐implantitis has not been evaluated yet.…”

Treatment of Peri-Implant Mucositis with Repeated Application of Chlorhexidine Chips or Gel during Supportive Therapy—A Randomized Clinical Trial

“…In order to increase the antimicrobial effect, antiseptic agents have been suggested [17]. Most antiseptic solutions, however, have been shown to have an almost negligible effect, which has been explained by a quick clearance from the pocket due to the high crevicular fluid flow rates and excessive bleeding after treatment-related mechanical irritation [18][19][20]. Therefore, slow-release devices have been introduced, which were supposed to deliver the active antimicrobial agents within days and to keep constant and high concentration within the pockets.…”