Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34571642›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of ophthalmology2021

Comparison of post-cataract surgery endophthalmitis rates using syringing or regurgitation on pressure over the lacrimal sac as a preoperative screening tool for nasolacrimal duct obstruction: An impact assessment of protocol alteration due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Pratik Shenoy, Sonali Mehta, Chintan Shah, Rajesh Joshi, Pradhnya Sen, Narendra Patidar, Gaurav Mohan Kohli, Alok Sen

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

8 authors.

Pratik ShenoyDepartment of Vitreo-Retina and Uvea, Sadguru Netra Chikistalaya, Chitrakoot, Madhya Pradesh, India.
Sonali MehtaDepartment of DNB Resident, Sadguru Netra Chikistalaya, Chitrakoot, Madhya Pradesh, India.
Chintan ShahDepartment of Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabsimus, Sadguru Netra Chikistalaya, Chitrakoot, Madhya Pradesh, India.
Rajesh JoshiDepartment of Cataract and IOL, Sadguru Netra Chikistalaya, Chitrakoot, Madhya Pradesh, India.
Pradhnya SenDepartment of Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabsimus, Sadguru Netra Chikistalaya, Chitrakoot, Madhya Pradesh, India.
Narendra PatidarDepartment of Orbit and Oculoplasty, Sadguru Netra Chikistalaya, Chitrakoot, Madhya Pradesh, India.
Gaurav Mohan KohliDepartment of Vitreo-Retina and Uvea, Sadguru Netra Chikistalaya, Chitrakoot, Madhya Pradesh, India.
Alok SenDepartment of Vitreo-Retina and Uvea, Sadguru Netra Chikistalaya, Chitrakoot, Madhya Pradesh, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the post-cataract endophthalmitis (PCE) rates among eyes undergoing syringing or regurgitation on pressure over the lacrimal sac (ROPLAS) test prior to cataract surgery. Methods: We performed a single-center, retrospective, comparative analysis of eyes developing PCE who underwent syringing prior to cataract surgery (group A) in the pre-COVID-19 era between November 1 2019 and January 31, 2020 and the eyes that underwent ROPLAS test prior to cataract surgery (group B) in the COVID-19 era between November 1, 2020 and January 31, 2021. Results: A total of 87,144 eyes underwent cataract surgery during the two time periods of the study. Syringing was performed in 48,071 eyes, whereas ROPLAS was performed in 39,073 eyes. In group A, 19 eyes (0.039%) developed PCE, whereas 20 eyes (0.051%) developed PCE in group B (P = 0.517). Between the two groups, the grade of anterior chamber cellular reaction (P = 0.675), hypopyon (P = 0.738), and vitreous haze (P = 0.664) were comparable. Gram-positive organisms were detected in 4 eyes in group A and 6 eyes in group B; 2 eyes in group A had gram-negative bacilli. The presenting visual acuity (Group A: LogMAR 1.42 and Group B: LogMAR 1.30) and final visual acuity (Group A: LogMAR 0.52 and Group B: LogMAR 0.5) were comparable between the two groups. (P = 0.544 and 0.384, respectively). Conclusion: The rates of PCE were comparable among the eyes undergoing either syringing test or ROPLAS prior to cataract surgery.

Indexed as

CataractCataract ExtractionCOVID-19EndophthalmitisLacrimal Duct ObstructionNasolacrimal DuctHumansPandemicsRetrospective StudiesSARS-CoV-2CataractCOVID-19endophthalmitisROPLASsyringing

Identifiers

PMID34571642
PMCPMC8597482
OpenAlexW3202075373

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.