Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29208819›Full record

ReviewIndian journal of ophthalmology2017

Antibiotic prophylaxis in cataract surgery - An evidence-based approach.

Aravind Haripriya

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Rational Drug Use in Extraocular SurgeriesTurkish journal of ophthalmology · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Endophthalmitis: a bibliometric study and visualization analysis from 1993 to 2023.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Aravind HaripriyaCataract and IOL Services, Aravind Eye Hospital, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Various protocols are being followed for endophthalmitis prophylaxis in cataract surgery, and this subject continues to be a matter of debate. We summarize the most recent evidence-based studies on this topic with additional stress on intracameral (IC) antibiotic prophylaxis. Here, we discuss several large, international clinical studies which discuss the efficacy, adoption, safety, cost, and newer trends in antibiotic prophylaxis. Majority of these studies report a significant reduction in endophthalmitis rates with IC antibiotic prophylaxis. Efficacy data have been reported for IC cefuroxime, vancomycin, and moxifloxacin. Surgeons are now looking for alternatives to vancomycin for IC prophylaxis because of its association with the rare but sight-threatening complication of hemorrhagic occlusive retinal vasculitis. A recent large clinical study shows convincing efficacy with IC moxifloxacin prophylaxis. Two large studies have also reported significant endophthalmitis reduction following use of IC antibiotic prophylaxis, in eyes with posterior capsule tear which are at highest risk for infection. Except for one randomized controlled trial, there is a lack of prospective data on this subject; however, considering the complexity of performing such studies, surgeons have to rely on the mounting evidence from other recent big data studies. Availability of approved intraocular antibiotic formulations will see a much higher adoption in the future.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsAntibiotic ProphylaxisCataract ExtractionEvidence-Based MedicineEye Infections, BacterialHumansSurgical Wound InfectionAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID29208819
PMCPMC5742967

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.