Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29417214›Full record

ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2018

Trends in treatment strategies for suspected bacterial endophthalmitis.

Greg D Fliney, Paula E Pecen, Jennifer N Cathcart, Alan G Palestine

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Efficacy and safety of intraocular lens removal combined with vitrectomy for acute endophthalmitis in pseudophakic eyes.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Greg D FlineyUniversity of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Paula E PecenDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Colorado School of Medicine and Rocky Mountain Lions Eye Institute, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA. paula.pecen@ucdenver.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2930-1352
Jennifer N CathcartDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Colorado School of Medicine and Rocky Mountain Lions Eye Institute, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA.
Alan G PalestineDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Colorado School of Medicine and Rocky Mountain Lions Eye Institute, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA.
Rocky Mountain MS Center · USUniversity of Colorado Denver · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo describe how vitreoretinal specialists have incorporated the Endophthalmitis Vitrectomy Study (EVS) findings into current practice, to highlight divergences from the EVS recommendations, and address the role of microbial culture in guiding additional treatments.

methodsThis is a cross-sectional survey of vitreoretinal specialists regarding indications used for performing a pars plana vitrectomy (PPV), selection of antibiotics for treatment, utilization of cultures, and treatment strategies for treatment-refractory patients with bacterial endophthalmitis.

resultsOf 681 physicians contacted, 149 (21.9%) responded. For patients with visual acuity of light perception or less, 75% of respondents utilized PPV. Intravitreal vancomycin and ceftazidime were used by 100% and 96% of participants respectively. Vitreal cultures were obtained more than 50% of the time by 86.5% of participants, and were used to influence retreatment less than 50% of the time by 77.8% of respondents. For patients with worsening clinical signs 48 hours after initial treatment, 69.8% of participants performed PPV with intravitreal antibiotics.

conclusionsAlthough most respondents followed the EVS guidelines, a minority deviated, and the majority generalized their strategy to other forms of endophthalmitis. There is significant variation in retreatment strategies, and while cultures are frequently obtained to help guide these treatments, they are utilized infrequently.

Indexed as

Surveys and QuestionnairesAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacteriaCataract ExtractionClinical CompetenceCross-Sectional StudiesEndophthalmitisEye Infections, BacterialHumansIntravitreal InjectionsPractice Guidelines as TopicSurgical Wound InfectionVitrectomyVitreous BodyAnti-Bacterial AgentsCataract surgeryEndophthalmitisEndophthalmitis Vitrectomy Study (EVS)Intravitreal antibioticVitrectomy

Identifiers

PMID29417214
OpenAlexW2787620469

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.