ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2026
Pars Plana Vitrectomy Using 0.025% Povidone-Iodine Irrigation for Acute Endophthalmitis: A Retrospective Case-Control Study.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare visual and anatomical outcomes of patients with acute endophthalmitis treated with pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) using either 0.025% povidone-iodine (PI) or standard balanced salt solution (BSS) irrigation and to evaluate the safety profile of intraocular PI. Design: Retrospective case-control study. Subjects: Ninety-two patients (48 in the PI group and 44 in the BSS group) aged ≥18 years with acute endophthalmitis of various etiologies treated between January 2017 and December 2024. Methods: All patients underwent 23- or 25-gauge PPV and received intravitreal moxifloxacin and dexamethasone. The study group received 0.025% PI irrigation, whereas the control group received standard BSS irrigation. Main outcomes included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), infection resolution, reactivation, and postoperative findings potentially associated with ocular toxicity. Safety assessments were based on slit-lamp examination, retinal imaging, and optical coherence tomography. Results: Clinical resolution at 1 week was achieved in 68.8% of eyes in the PI group and 65.9% in the control group ( Conclusion: In this retrospective case-control study, 0.025% PI irrigation during PPV was not associated with worse short-term anatomical or visual outcomes compared with standard BSS irrigation. Although postoperative adverse findings were less frequent in the PI group, this result should be interpreted cautiously given the non-randomized design and earlier timing of vitrectomy in the PI group. Prospective controlled studies are needed to confirm the safety and potential efficacy of this approach.
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.