Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41038947›Full record

Trial reportScientific reports2025

A double-blind, randomized controlled pilot study comparing the safety of intracameral levofloxacin and intracameral cefazolin in patients undergoing cataract surgery.

Yan Tong Koh, Tun Kuan Yeo, Zhi Hong Toh, John Xin Hao Wong, Wei Kiong Ngo, Han Bor Fam, Don Chern Kuok Pek

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06710977 (A Double-blind, Randomized Controlled Pilot Study Comparing the Safety and Efficacy of Intracameral Levofloxacin and Intracameral Cefazolin in Cataract Surgery), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

NCT06710977 early_phase1completednot on this map

A Double-blind, Randomized Controlled Pilot Study Comparing the Safety and Efficacy of Intracameral Levofloxacin and Intracameral Cefazolin in Cataract Surgery

TypeinterventionalSponsorTan Tock Seng HospitalRan2022 to 2024Enrolled50ConditionsCataractArmsSafety of intracameral levofloxacin in cataract surgery, Use of intracameral cefazolin in cataract surgery
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Yan Tong KohNational Healthcare Group Eye Institute, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, 308433, Singapore. yan_tong_koh@ttsh.com.sg.
Tun Kuan YeoEye & Retina Surgeons, Singapore, Singapore.
Zhi Hong TohNational Healthcare Group Eye Institute, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, 308433, Singapore.
John Xin Hao WongAtlas Eye Specialist Centre, Singapore, Singapore.
Wei Kiong NgoNational Healthcare Group Eye Institute, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, 308433, Singapore.
Han Bor FamNational Healthcare Group Eye Institute, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, 308433, Singapore.
Don Chern Kuok PekLumin Eye Specialists, Singapore, Singapore.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To compare the safety of intracameral levofloxacin and intracameral cefazolin in patients undergoing cataract surgery. In this prospective, double-blind, randomized study, patients with senile cataracts who were undergoing phacoemulsification were assigned to receive intracameral levofloxacin (0.1 ml/0.5 mg; Cravit® 0.5%; Santen Pharmaceutical Ltd.) or intracameral cefazolin (0.1 ml/1 mg; generic). The endpoints were the occurrence of endophthalmitis during the 3-month follow-up period, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), the presence of anterior chamber (AC) inflammation with grading of AC cells and presence of flare, along with intraocular pressure (IOP), central corneal thickness (CCT), central foveal thickness (CFT), and cell density. A total of 50 patients (50 eyes) were enrolled, randomized, and completed the study. No cases of endophthalmitis were reported in either treatment group. There were no significant differences in BCVA, AC inflammation, IOP, CCT, CFT, or cell density between the groups at any timepoint. Importantly, no dose errors or serious adverse events were reported in either group. This study provides proof of concept that prophylactic intracameral levofloxacin (0.1 ml/0.5 mg) may have a comparable safety profile to intracameral cefazolin (0.1 ml/1 mg) in patients undergoing cataract surgery. Intracameral levofloxacin (0.1 ml/0.5 mg) may offer a viable alternative to cefazolin (0.1 ml/1 mg), particularly for patients with penicillin allergies, while also reducing the risk of dilution errors by eliminating the need for reconstitution. Larger, multicenter studies are warranted to confirm the efficacy of levofloxacin (0.1 ml/0.5 mg) in preventing endophthalmitis.NCT06710977, 02/12/2024, retrospectively registered.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsCataract ExtractionCefazolinLevofloxacinAgedAged, 80 and overAnterior ChamberDouble-Blind MethodEndophthalmitisFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhacoemulsificationPilot ProjectsProspective StudiesAnti-Bacterial AgentsCefazolinLevofloxacinAntibioticsCataract surgeryEndophthalmitisProphylaxisSafety

Identifiers

PMID41038947
PMCPMC12491424

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.