Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
UV-C light vs iodine for cleaning dog eyelids before surgery
By Treadwell, Caroline et al.·Published in Veterinary ophthalmology·2026·Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, United States·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Antimicrobial Effect of Ultraviolet C (UV-C) Light Compared to Standard Povidone-Iodine Protocol for Preoperative Disinfection of the Periocular Area.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of six beagles had their eyelids cleaned before surgery using either a standard iodine solution or ultraviolet C (UV-C) light to see which was better at killing bacteria. The results showed that both UV-C light and iodine were effective at reducing bacteria, while saline was not effective at all. One dog did have a mild skin reaction to the iodine, but overall, there were no serious side effects from either cleaning method. This suggests that UV-C light could be a safe alternative for disinfecting around the eyes of dogs before surgery.
People also search for: dog eye cleaning before surgery · UV-C light for dogs · povidone-iodine side effects in dogs
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the antimicrobial effect of 275 nm wavelength ultraviolet C (UV-C) light on the periocular area of canine eyes for preoperative disinfection compared to standard 10% povidone-iodine (PI) solution preparation. METHODS: The upper and lower eyelids of six research-bred beagles were equally divided into two sections (medial and lateral). Each section received periocular cleansing with one of the following treatments: (1) saline, (2) baby shampoo, (3) baby shampoo and PI solution, or (4) baby shampoo and UV-C light therapy. Routine bacterial culture swabs were used to collect samples from the designated areas 30 min after the respective treatments. RESULTS: Bacterial counts were significantly higher in eyelids treated with saline compared to UV-C light and PI treatments, respectively. The bacterial counts were significantly higher in the saline-treated eyelids compared to baby shampoo, PI, and UV-C treatments in the upper medial eyelid location. The remainder of the eyelid locations were not statistically significant between groups. One dog developed contact dermatitis after receiving PI cleansing. None of the dogs developed serious complications related to the disinfection techniques. CONCLUSION: UV-C light treatment (combined with baby shampoo) is comparable to PI solution (combined with baby shampoo) in reducing the number of bacteria on the periocular surface; no adverse eyelid effects were noted after UV-C light exposure.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40846685/