Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20966972›Full record

ArticleEye (London, England)2011

Endogenous endophthalmitis: 10-year experience at a tertiary referral centre.

P P Connell, E C O'Neill, D Fabinyi, F M A Islam, R Buttery, M McCombe, R W Essex, E Roufail, B Clark, D Chiu and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Eye (London, England), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 102 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
102citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

102 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

42 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

P P ConnellCentre for Eye Research Australia, The Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, University of Melbourne, East Melbourne, VIC, Australia. drpaulconnell@gmail.com
E C O'Neill
D Fabinyi
F M A Islam
R Buttery
M McCombe
R W Essex
E Roufail
B Clark
D Chiu
W Campbell
P Allen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeEndogenous endophthalmitis (EE) is a sight-threatening emergency and the aetiology is often multifactorial. Delayed diagnosis may exacerbate the poor visual prognosis. We describe the management and visual outcomes of EE presenting to a tertiary referral centre. PATIENTS AND

methodsA prospective consecutive case series of 64 patients presenting with presumed EE from 1997 to 2007 to the Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital were included. All data were collected in a standardized manner. Outcome measures included: visual acuity, microbial profiles, and vitrectomy rate.

resultsIn total, 64 cases of EE were identified over the study period with a mean age of 57.5 years, and 53.5% were male. Presenting acuities ranged from Snellen 6/6 to no perception of light (NPL). Identifiable risk factors were present in 78.1%, with the majority related to intravenous drug abuse. A 64.1% culture positivity rate was recorded. A vitrectomy rate of 57, 56, and 21% was recorded in documented bacterial, fungal, and no growth cases, respectively. Final Snellen acuities ranged from 6/6 to NPL. A total of 5 out of 64 eyes were enucleated, of which 3 identified Klebsiella species. Better visual outcome was documented in fungal cases.

conclusionEE is a serious ocular condition and has a varied aetiology. Visual outcomes are often poor, irrespective of the method of management. Fungal aetiology often confers a better prognosis, and vitrectomy is advocated for bacterial proven cases.

Indexed as

EndophthalmitisAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAustraliaBacteriaEye Infections, BacterialFemaleFungiHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisProspective StudiesRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID20966972
PMCPMC3144637

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.