Dataset Information

Intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF agents and antibiotic prophylaxis for endophthalmitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether the use of local antibiotics is a beneficial prophylactic treatment for endophthalmitis in patients treated with anti-VEGF agents. We searched the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, and the Cochrane Library over the period January 2007 to December 2016. The search terms used included "Endophthalmitis", "Antibiotic" and "Intravitreal injection". Studies in which the patients were treated exclusively with intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF were selected. Eight studies fit the inclusion criteria, which included a total of 276,774 injections; 109,178 (39.45%) were associated with the use of antibiotics and 114,821 (60.55%) were not associated with the use of antibiotics. Our meta-analysis indicated a significant risk for endophthalmitis that was 1.70 times greater with the use of antibiotics than that without antibiotics, with a confidence interval of 1.08 to 2.66 (p?=?0.02). A meta-regression indicated that the location (operating rooms versus outpatient clinics) of injection did not have a significant effect on the incidence of endophthalmitis. The prophylactic use of antibiotics when administering anti-VEGF intravitreal injections may contribute to a greater incidence of endophthalmitis. This finding, in addition to reducing costs, would eliminate a treatment that has been shown to be unnecessary and even harmful to patients.

SUBMITTER: Bande MF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5741717 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF agents and antibiotic prophylaxis for endophthalmitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Bande Manuel F MF Mansilla Raquel R Pata María P MP Fernández Maribel M Blanco-Teijeiro María José MJ Piñeiro Antonio A Gómez-Ulla Francisco F

Scientific reports 20171222 1

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether the use of local antibiotics is a beneficial prophylactic treatment for endophthalmitis in patients treated with anti-VEGF agents. We searched the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, and the Cochrane Library over the period January 2007 to December 2016. The search terms used included "Endophthalmitis", "Antibiotic" and "Intravitreal injection". Studies in which the patients were treated exclusively with intravitreal injections of ...[more]

PMID: 29273773

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeIntravitreal (IVT) injections of the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab are commonly prescribed to treat neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). Studies comparing inflammation rates in large populations of patients receiving these agents and the treatment of ocular inflammation post-IVT anti-VEGF injections are scarce. In this study, we compared rates of endophthalmitis claims (sterile and infectious) following IVT anti-VEGF injections to determine the risk factors associated with developing endophthalmitis, and examined the claims for subsequent treatment.Patients and methodsThis retrospective cohort study of USA claims data examined the risk of developing endophthalmitis following IVT injection of aflibercept, bevacizumab, or ranibizumab in patients with nAMD between 11/18/2011 and 5/31/2013. The primary study outcome was occurrence of endophthalmitis within 30 days of a claim for an IVT anti-VEGF injection. Endophthalmitis rates were calculated separately for aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab, followed by pairwise comparisons of endophthalmitis frequencies among the 3 treatments.ResultsThis analysis included 818,558 injections from 156,594 patients with nAMD. The rates (% [n/N]) of endophthalmitis following aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab IVT injections were 0.100% (136/135,973), 0.056% (268/481,572), and 0.047% (94/201,013), respectively. In a multivariate analysis, aflibercept was associated with a significantly higher risk of endophthalmitis vs ranibizumab (adjusted odds ratio, 2.19; 95% CI: 1.68-2.85; P<0.0001). The risk of endophthalmitis was similar for bevacizumab and ranibizumab. Within 14 days after endophthalmitis, 38.6% of cases received injectable antibiotics, 15.3% received injectable steroids, and 30.3% underwent vitrectomy.ConclusionThe rate of endophthalmitis was very low, but higher following IVT injection with aflibercept compared with both bevacizumab and ranibizumab in patients with nAMD.

Project description:PurposeRoutine use of face masks for patients and physicians during intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections has increased with the emergence of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. This study evaluates the impact of universal face mask use on rates and outcomes of post-injection endophthalmitis (PIE).DesignRetrospective, multicenter, comparative cohort study.ParticipantsEyes receiving intravitreal anti-VEGF injections from October 1, 2019, to July 31, 2020, at 12 centers.MethodsCases were divided into a "no face mask" group if no face masks were worn by the physician or patient during intravitreal injections or a "universal face mask" group if face masks were worn by the physician, ancillary staff, and patient during intravitreal injections.Main outcome measuresRate of endophthalmitis, microbial spectrum, and visual acuity (VA).ResultsOf 505 968 intravitreal injections administered in 110 547 eyes, 85 of 294 514 (0.0289%; 1 in 3464 injections) cases of presumed endophthalmitis occurred in the "no face mask" group, and 45 of 211 454 (0.0213%; 1 in 4699) cases occurred in the "universal face mask" group (odds ratio [OR], 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51-1.18; P = 0.097). In the "no face mask" group, there were 27 cases (0.0092%; 1 in 10 908 injections) of culture-positive endophthalmitis compared with 9 cases (0.004%; 1 in 23 494) in the "universal face mask" group (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.22-0.99; P = 0.041). Three cases of oral flora-associated endophthalmitis occurred in the "no face mask" group (0.001%; 1 in 98 171 injections) compared with 1 (0.0005%; 1 in 211 454) in the "universal face mask" group (P = 0.645). Patients presented a mean (range) 4.9 (1-30) days after the causative injection, and mean logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) VA at endophthalmitis presentation was 2.04 (~20/2200) for "no face mask" group compared with 1.65 (~20/900) for the "universal face mask" group (P = 0.022), although no difference was observed 3 months after treatment (P = 0.764).ConclusionsIn a large, multicenter, retrospective study, physician and patient face mask use during intravitreal anti-VEGF injections did not alter the risk of presumed acute-onset bacterial endophthalmitis, but there was a reduced rate of culture-positive endophthalmitis. Three months after presentation, there was no difference in VA between the groups.

Project description:Despite endophthalmitis being the most feared complication, antibioprophylaxis remains controversial in intravitreal injections. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on the effects of antibioprophylaxis in intravitreal injections in the prevention of endophthalmitis. The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and Science Direct databases were searched for studies comparing groups with and without antibiotics in intravitreal injection, with the use of the following keywords: "antibiotic*", "endophthalmitis" and "intravitreal injection*". To be included, studies needed to specify number of participants and number of endophthalmitis within each group (with and without antibiotics). We conducted meta-analysis on the prevalence of clinical endophthalmitis including both culture-proven and culture negative samples. Nine studies were included. A total of 88 incidences of endophthalmitis were reported from 174,159 injections (0.051% i.e., one incidence of endophthalmitis for 1979 injections). Specifically, 59 incidences of endophthalmitis were reported from 113,530 injections in the group with antibiotics (0.052% or one incidence of endophthalmitis for 1924 injections) and 29 incidences of endophthalmitis from 60,633 injections in the group without antibiotics (0.048% or one endophthalmitis for 2091 injections). Our meta-analysis did not report a significant difference in the prevalence of clinical endophthalimitis between the two groups with and without topical antibiotics: the odds ratio of clinical endophthalimitis was 0.804 (CI95% 0.384-1.682, p = 0.56) for the antibiotic group compared with the group without antibiotics. In conclusion, we performed the first large meta-analysis demonstrating that antibioprophylaxis is not required in intravitreal injections. Strict rules of asepsis remain the only evidence-based prophylaxis of endophthalmitis. The results support initiatives to reduce the global threat of resistance to antibiotics.

Dataset Information

Intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF agents and antibiotic prophylaxis for endophthalmitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Publications

Intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF agents and antibiotic prophylaxis for endophthalmitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets