Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34937229›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of ophthalmology2022

Clinical features and microbiology of post-cataract surgery endophthalmitis with and without intracameral moxifloxacin prophylaxis: Endophthalmitis prophylaxis study report 3.

Vivek P Dave, Vivek M Singh, Jagadesh C Reddy, Savitri Sharma, Joveeta Joseph, Taraprasad Das

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  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

6 authors.

Vivek P DaveSrimati Kanuri Santhamma Center for Vitreoretinal Diseases, LV Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Vivek M SinghCataract and Refractive Surgery Services, The Cornea Institute, LV Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Jagadesh C ReddyCataract and Refractive Surgery Services, The Cornea Institute, LV Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Savitri SharmaJhaveri Microbiology Center, LV Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Joveeta JosephJhaveri Microbiology Center, LV Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Taraprasad DasSrimati Kanuri Santhamma Center for Vitreoretinal Diseases, LV Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aimed to analyze the clinical presentations, microbiology, and management outcomes of post-cataract surgery endophthalmitis, with and without intracameral moxifloxacin prophylaxis.

methodsThis study was designed as a retrospective, consecutive, comparative case series. Records of consecutive cataract surgery from January 1, 2015, till June 30, 2020, were analyzed. The cases that developed endophthalmitis were analyzed. The endophthalmitis cases were divided by their prophylaxis treatment into two groups: with intracameral moxifloxacin (ICM) and without (N-ICM). Inclusion criteria were (1) age ≥ 18 years, (2) cataract surgery with intraocular lens implantation, (3) endophthalmitis within 6 weeks of cataract surgery, and (4) cataract surgery in the institute by any of the three methods-phacoemulsification, manual small incision cataract surgery, and extracapsular cataract extraction.

resultsIn the study period, 66,967 cataract surgeries were performed; 48.7% (n = 32,649) did not receive ICM. There was no difference between the N-ICM and ICM groups in the incidence of clinical (n = 21, 0.064% and n = 15, 0.043%; P = 0.23) and culture proven (n = 19, 0.033% and n = 11, 0.023%; P = 0.99) endophthalmitis, respectively. Greater number of patients in the N-ICM group had lid edema (76.2% vs. 40%; P = 0.03), corneal edema (71.4% vs. 33.3%; P = 0.03) and lower presenting vision with available correction (logMAR [logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution] 1.26 ± 1.2 vs. logMAR 0.54 ± 0.85; P = 0.02). The final best-corrected visual acuity following treatment was worse in the N-ICM group (logMAR 1.26 ± 1.2 vs. 0.54 ± 0.85; P = 0.02).

conclusionEndophthalmitis after intracameral moxifloxacin may have relatively milder signs and symptoms and may respond better to treatment.

Indexed as

CataractCataract ExtractionEndophthalmitisEye Infections, BacterialAdolescentAnterior ChamberAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntibiotic ProphylaxisHumansMoxifloxacinPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesAnti-Bacterial AgentsMoxifloxacinEndophthalmitisintracameral antibioticsintracameral moxifloxacinprophylaxis

Identifiers

PMID34937229
PMCPMC8917526

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.