Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37857260›Full record

ReviewOphthalmic research2023

Early Vitrectomy for Endophthalmitis: Are EVS Guidelines Still Valid?

Parsa Panahi, Nasser Mirzakouchaki-Borujeni, Omid Pourdakan, J Fernando Arévalo

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Ophthalmic research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Areas of uncertainty in endophthalmitis care.World journal of clinical cases · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. 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 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Parsa PanahiNoor Ophthalmology Research Center, Noor Eye Hospital, Tehran, Iran.
Nasser Mirzakouchaki-BorujeniStudent Research Committee, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Omid PourdakanDepartment of Molecular Imaging, Faculty of Advanced Technologies in Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
J Fernando ArévaloWilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Iran University of Medical Sciences · IRJohns Hopkins Medicine · USNoor Eye Hospital · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEndophthalmitis, a potentially sight-threatening condition, remains a challenge for ophthalmologists worldwide. The endophthalmitis vitrectomy study (EVS) conducted in 1995 compared vitrectomy and intravitreal antibiotic injections to intravitreal antibiotic injections alone for acute post-cataract surgery and secondary intraocular lens endophthalmitis, setting treatment guidelines. However, the landscape of clinical practice has evolved considerably since then, raising questions about the applicability of EVS recommendations today. SUMMARY: Recent studies have proposed that early and complete vitrectomy (CEVE) could potentially be an effective approach for managing endophthalmitis cases, irrespective of the initial visual acuity. However, it is important to note that the level of rigor in these recent studies may not match that of the EVS study, and as such, this assertion should be considered with caution. Furthermore, the EVS study exclusively focused on post-cataract surgery cases, leaving other endophthalmitis types, like post-intravitreal injection and post-traumatic endophthalmitis, without standardized treatment guidelines. Research exploring the role of early vitrectomy in these contexts yields mixed results, emphasizing the need for further investigation and well-designed prospective trials. Endogenous endophthalmitis, originating from systemic infections, adds complexity to the scenario. While early vitrectomy shows promise in specific cases, conflicting evidence necessitates comprehensive research. KEY MESSAGES: This review underscores the necessity for tailored treatment strategies, supporting early vitrectomy when clinically indicated, and advocating for prospective trials to clarify its role in diverse endophthalmitis scenarios. As surgical techniques and antimicrobial therapies continue to advance, reevaluating treatment paradigms becomes crucial to enhance patient outcomes and protect ocular health.

Indexed as

CataractEndophthalmitisEye Infections, BacterialAnti-Bacterial AgentsHumansPostoperative ComplicationsProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesVitrectomyAnti-Bacterial AgentsEndophthalmitisEVS guidelinesVitrectomy

Identifiers

PMID37857260
PMCPMC10634277
OpenAlexW4387769874

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.