Dataset Information

Comparative analysis of the safety and efficacy of intracameral cefuroxime, moxifloxacin and vancomycin at the end of cataract surgery: a meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Current practice methods are unclear as to the most safe and effective prophylactic pharmacotherapy and method of delivery to reduce postoperative endophthalmitis occurrence. METHODS:A systematic review and meta-analysis using Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines was performed to compare the efficacy of intracameral cefuroxime, moxifloxacin and vancomycin in preventing postphacoemulsification cataract surgery endophthalmitis. A safety analysis of intracameral antibiotics was concurrently performed. DATA SOURCES:BIOSIS Previews, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Library, Dissertations & Theses, EMBASE, PubMed, ScienceDirect and Scopus were searched from inception to January 2017. Data were pooled using a random effects model. All articles were individually reviewed and data were extracted by two independent reviewers. Funnel plot, risk of bias and quality of evidence analyses were performed. RESULTS:Seventeen studies with over 900?000 eyes were included, which favoured the use of intracameral antibiotics at the end of cataract surgery (OR 0.20; 95%?CI 0.13 to 0.32; P<0.00001). The average weighted postoperative endophthalmitis incidence rates with intracameral cefuroxime, moxifloxacin and vancomycin were 0.0332%, 0.0153% and 0.0106%, respectively. Secondary analyses showed no difference in efficacy between intracameral plus topical antibiotics versus intracameral alone (P>0.3). Most studies had low to moderate risk of bias. The safety analysis showed minimal toxicity for moxifloxacin. Dosing errors led to the majority of toxicities with cefuroxime. Although rare, vancomycin was associated with toxic retinal events. CONCLUSION:Intracameral cefuroxime and moxifloxacin reduced endophthalmitis rates compared with controls with minimal or no toxicity events at standard doses. Additionally, intracameral antibiotics alone may be as effective as intracameral plus topical antibiotics.

SUBMITTER: Bowen RC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6041193 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparative analysis of the safety and efficacy of intracameral cefuroxime, moxifloxacin and vancomycin at the end of cataract surgery: a meta-analysis.

Bowen Randy C RC Zhou Andrew Xingyu AX Bondalapati Sailaja S Lawyer Thomas W TW Snow Karisa B KB Evans Patrick R PR Bardsley Tyler T McFarland Mary M Kliethermes Matthew M Shi Dallas D Mamalis Christina A CA Greene Tom T Rudnisky Christopher J CJ Ambati Balamurali Krishna BK

The British journal of ophthalmology 20180111 9

<h4>Background</h4>Current practice methods are unclear as to the most safe and effective prophylactic pharmacotherapy and method of delivery to reduce postoperative endophthalmitis occurrence.<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic review and meta-analysis using Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines was performed to compare the efficacy of intracameral cefuroxime, moxifloxacin and vancomycin in preventing postphacoemulsification cataract surgery endophthalmitis. A safety analys ...[more]

PMID: 29326317

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCataract surgery in diabetics is more technically challenging due to a number of factors including poor intraoperative pupil dilation and a higher risk of vision threatening complications. This study evaluates the safety and efficacy of an intracameral combination of 2 mydriatics and 1 anesthetic (ICMA, Mydrane) for cataract surgery in patients with well-controlled type-2 diabetes.MethodsPost-hoc subgroup analysis of a phase 3 randomized study, comparing ICMA to a conventional topical regimen. Data were collected from 68 centers in Europe and Algeria. Only well-controlled type-2 diabetics, free of pre-proliferative retinopathy, were included. The results for non-diabetics are also reported. The primary efficacy variable was successful capsulorhexis without additional mydriatic treatment. Postoperative safety included adverse events, endothelial cell density and vision.ResultsAmong 591 randomized patients, 57 (9.6%) had controlled type 2 diabetes [24 (42.1%) in the ICMA Group and 33 (57.9%) in the Topical Group; intention-to-treat (ITT) set]. Among diabetics, capsulorhexis was successfully performed without additional mydriatics in 24 (96.0%; modified-ITT set) patients in the ICMA Group and 26 (89.7%) in the Topical Group. These proportions were similar in non-diabetics. No diabetic patient [1 (0.5%) non-diabetics] in the ICMA Group had a significant decrease in pupil size (≥3 mm) intraoperatively compared to 4 (16.0%; modified-ITT set) diabetics [16 (7.3%) non-diabetics] in the Topical group. Ocular AE among diabetics occurred in 2 (8.0%; Safety set) patients in the ICMA Group and 5 (16.7%) in the Topical Group. Endothelial cell density at 1 month postoperatively was similar between groups in diabetics (P = 0.627) and non-diabetics (P = 0.368).ConclusionsICMA is effective and can be safely used in patients with well-controlled diabetes, with potential advantages compared to a topical regimen including reduced systemic risk, better corneal integrity and reduced risk of ocular complications.Trial registrationThe trial was registered at (reference # NCT02101359) on April 2, 2014.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The purpose of this study was to investigate the ocular bacterial flora in patients scheduled to undergo cataract surgery and compare the antibacterial effects of besifloxacin ophthalmic suspension 0.6% and moxifloxacin ophthalmic solution 0.5% in these patients. METHODS:This was a prospective, randomized, laboratory-masked clinical trial. Patients received besifloxacin or moxifloxacin "quater in die" or QID (four times a day) for 3 days before cataract surgery in the surgical eye and 1 hour before surgery in the nonsurgical fellow eye. Conjunctival and eyelid swabs were obtained from both eyes at baseline and after treatment, on the day of surgery (Visit 2). Swabs were processed for bacterial colony counts (in terms of colony-forming units) and species identification. In vitro antibiotic susceptibilities of isolates were determined using Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute breakpoints. RESULTS:Fifty-nine patients (n=28 besifloxacin, n=31 moxifloxacin) completed the study. The majority (73%) of conjunctival samples were culture negative at baseline. The most frequent isolates were coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS, 89%), specifically Staphylococcus epidermidis (72%). Both fluoroquinolones reduced the lid CFU values when administered QID for 3 days (P?0.019), but only besifloxacin reduced the lid CFU estimate 1 hour following instillation of a single drop (P=0.039). Fewer besifloxacin-treated eyes had lids that were culture positive for CoNS at Visit 2 compared with moxifloxacin-treated eyes regardless of dosing regimen (P?0.03). The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC90) of besifloxacin against methicillin-resistant S. epidermidis (MRSE) was eightfold lower than that of moxifloxacin. CONCLUSION:Besifloxacin appeared more effective in reducing bacterial counts on eyelids of patients undergoing cataract surgery, with significant reductions as early as 1 hour postdose, compared with moxifloxacin. Besifloxacin was more active in vitro against MRSE.

Project description:Vancomycin and teicoplanin are the glycopeptides currently in use for the treatment of infections caused by invasive beta-lactam-resistant gram-positive organisms. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that have compared vancomycin and teicoplanin administered systemically for the treatment of suspected or proven infections. A comprehensive search of trials without year, language, or publication status restrictions was performed. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Two reviewers independently extracted the data. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled by using the fixed-effect model (RRs of >1 favor vancomycin). Twenty-four trials were included. All-cause mortality was similar overall (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.21), and there was no significant heterogeneity. In trials that used adequate allocation concealment, the results favored teicoplanin (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.06), while in trials with unknown methods or inadequate concealment, the results favored vancomycin (RR, 3.61; 95% CI, 1.27 to 10.30). The latter trials might have recruited more severely ill patients. No other variable affected the RRs for mortality, including the assessment of glycopeptides administered empirically or for proven infections, neutropenia, the participant's age, and drug dosing. There were no significant differences between teicoplanin and vancomycin with regard to clinical failure (RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.05), microbiological failure (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.65), and other efficacy outcomes. Lower RRs (in favor of teicoplanin) for clinical failure were observed with a lower risk of bias and when treatment was initiated for infections caused by gram-positive organisms rather than empirically. Total adverse events (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.74), nephrotoxicity (RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.61), and red man syndrome were significantly less frequent with teicoplanin. Teicoplanin is not inferior to vancomycin with regard to efficacy and is associated with a lower adverse event rate than vancomycin.

Dataset Information

Comparative analysis of the safety and efficacy of intracameral cefuroxime, moxifloxacin and vancomycin at the end of cataract surgery: a meta-analysis.

Publications

Comparative analysis of the safety and efficacy of intracameral cefuroxime, moxifloxacin and vancomycin at the end of cataract surgery: a meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure