ArticleIndian journal of ophthalmology2022
Real-life comparison of three intravitreal antibiotic drug regimens in endophthalmitis.
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 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of intracameral moxifloxacin in prevention of postcataract surgery endophthalmitis: randomized control trial.Journal of cataract and refractive surgery · 2026Trial
- Current landscape of drug induced retinal vasculitis.Journal of ophthalmic inflammation and infection · 2026Review
- New Approaches to Overcoming Antimicrobial Resistance in Endophthalmitis.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Butyrate Ameliorates Intraocular Bacterial Infection by Promoting Autophagy and Attenuating the Inflammatory Response.Infection and immunity · 2023Article
- Response to comments on: Real-life comparison of three intravitreal antibiotic drug regimens in endophthalmitis.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Comment on: Real-life comparison of three intravitreal antibiotic drug regimens in endophthalmitis.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Commentary: Is it time to re-evaluate the empiric intravitreal antibiotic therapy in infectious bacterial endophthalmitis?Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Real-life comparison of three intravitreal drug regimens used in cases of endophthalmitis at a tertiary care center in India. Methods: In this prospective, comparative study, patients of bacterial endophthalmitis were grouped according to intravitreal antibiotic drug regimens into Group 1 (ceftazidime and vancomycin), Group 2 (piperacillin + tazobactam and vancomycin), and Group 3 (imipenem and vancomycin). Forty-eight hours after injection nonresponding/worsening patients underwent vitrectomy. Vitreous samples were subjected to microbiological and pharmacokinetic tests. Results: A total of 64 patients were included and divided into Group 1: 29, Group 2: 20, and Group 3: 15 cases. Also, 75% of patients were post-surgical endophthalmitis, whereas 25% were post-traumatic. Improvement in vision (V Conclusion: The choice of antibiotics did not affect the rate of vitrectomy and final vision in a real-life scenario. Ceftazidime and vancomycin can still be used as first-line intravitreal antibiotics owing to their comparable microbial sensitivity profile and adequate ocular bioavailability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.