Long-Term Stability, Sterility, And Cost-Effectiveness of 0.05% Chlorhexidine Gluconate as Antisepsis for Intravitreal Injection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Commercially available chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) has a beyond-use date of 24 h. This study evaluated the stability and sterility of 0.05% CHG for 30 days after opening and compared its cost to povidone iodine (PI) for intravitreal injection antisepsis. Methods: 0.05% CHG was aliquoted into 1-mL syringes and stored at room temperature or refrigerated. Turbidity, pH, high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), and sterility testing were performed. A cost analysis was conducted. Results: 0.05% CHG remained stable for at least 30 days. All samples had measured turbidity <0.5 nephelometric turbidity units. The pH of all samples remained between 5.0 and 7.0. HPLC demonstrated CHG concentration at day 30 relative to day 0 of 98.52% ± 4.16% at room temperature and 99.99% ± 3.38% at 2°C –6°C. The cost per week to perform 150 injections using 0.05% CHG was $463.25 when opening a new bottle daily compared with $16.73 for 5% PI. This cost decreased to $23.16 when utilizing a bottle of CHG for 30 days. Conclusion: 0.05% CHG remains stable and sterile for at least 30 days after opening. The ability to use CHG for at least 30 days after its opening significantly decreases its utilization expense.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".