Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35715871›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of retina and vitreous2022

Ocular inflammation after agitation of siliconized and silicone oil-free syringes: a randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial.

Natasha Ferreira Santos da Cruz, Murilo Ubukata Polizelli, Felipe Picanço Muralha, Clarice Neuenschwander Lins de Morais, Octaviano Magalhães Silva Junior, Mauricio Maia, Gustavo Barreto Melo, Michel Eid Farah

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of retina and vitreous, 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
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Natasha Ferreira Santos da CruzDepartment of Ophthalmology, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Murilo Ubukata PolizelliDepartment of Ophthalmology, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Felipe Picanço MuralhaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Clarice Neuenschwander Lins de MoraisDepartment of Virology, Foundation Oswaldo Cruz, Aggeu Magalhães Institute, Recife, PE, Brazil.
Octaviano Magalhães Silva JuniorDepartment of Ophthalmology, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Mauricio MaiaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Gustavo Barreto MeloDepartment of Ophthalmology, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil. gustavobmelo@yahoo.com.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5765-2008
Michel Eid FarahDepartment of Ophthalmology, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Universidade Federal de São Paulo · BRFundação Oswaldo Cruz · BRYahoo (Spain) · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNoninfectious endophthalmitis may be misdiagnosed, leading to serious clinical implications. So far, its causative factors remain unknown. Therefore, this study assessed the role of silicone oil and syringe agitation in the development of inflammation after intravitreal injection of aflibercept.

methodsA randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial included subjects with an indication of intravitreal antiangiogenic therapy prior to vitrectomy for proliferative diabetic retinopathy. Aflibercept was injected 48 h before surgery. The control group received the injection without agitation, while the intervention group was injected with a previously agitated syringe by flicking with either a siliconized or silicone oil-free syringe. The primary endpoint was the presence of anterior chamber reaction (ACR) at 48 h. Aqueous samples were collected and underwent cytometric bead array analysis for quantification of interleukins and chemokines.

resultsForty-one individuals were included (21 in the agitation group and 20 in the no-agitation group). None of the included eyes showed baseline signs of AC cells, hyperemia or pain complaint, while 10% of control group and 80% of agitation group showed AC cells 48 h after injection of aflibercept with SR syringe. There were no differences in the mean variations of all cytokines and chemokines by agitation status. However, there was a marginally significant increase between the mean variations of IP-10 (p = 0.057) and IL-8 (p = 0.058) in the siliconized one.

conclusionThis clinical trial discloses a potential role of agitation and siliconized syringes in the development of inflammation after an intravitreal injection of aflibercept. These findings have important clinical implications for all healthcare practitioners who perform intravitreal injections.

trial registrationBrazilian Registry of Clinical Trials, RBR-95ddhp. Registered 12 May 2019, http://www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-95ddhp/.

Indexed as

Intravitreal injectionSilicone OilSyringe

Identifiers

PMID35715871
PMCPMC9205077
OpenAlexW4283031288

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.