Intravitreal Antibiotics versus Early Vitrectomy Plus Intravitreal Antibiotics for Postinjection Endophthalmitis

IF 4.4 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Connor J. Ross BS , Sophia Ghauri BS , Joshua B. Gilbert EdM , Daniel Hu BA , Varun Ullanat MS , Dan Gong MD , Paul B. Greenberg MD, MPH , Dean Eliott MD , Tobias Elze PhD , Alice Lorch MD, MPH , Joan W. Miller MD , Magdalena G. Krzystolik MD
{"title":"Intravitreal Antibiotics versus Early Vitrectomy Plus Intravitreal Antibiotics for Postinjection Endophthalmitis","authors":"Connor J. Ross BS ,&nbsp;Sophia Ghauri BS ,&nbsp;Joshua B. Gilbert EdM ,&nbsp;Daniel Hu BA ,&nbsp;Varun Ullanat MS ,&nbsp;Dan Gong MD ,&nbsp;Paul B. Greenberg MD, MPH ,&nbsp;Dean Eliott MD ,&nbsp;Tobias Elze PhD ,&nbsp;Alice Lorch MD, MPH ,&nbsp;Joan W. Miller MD ,&nbsp;Magdalena G. Krzystolik MD","doi":"10.1016/j.oret.2024.09.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>To determine if intravitreal injection of antibiotics alone versus early pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) plus injection of intravitreal antibiotics predicted better or worse visual outcomes for patients with endophthalmitis after anti-VEGF injections.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Retrospective cohort study.</div></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><div>Patients developing endophthalmitis after receiving an intravitreal anti-VEGF injection from the American Academy of Ophthalmology IRIS® (Intelligent Research in Sight) Registry between 2016 and 2020.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Inclusion criteria were endophthalmitis diagnosis within 1 to 28 days after anti-VEGF injection and a recorded visual acuity (VA) at baseline, on the day of diagnosis, and posttreatment. Patients in the Injection Only group underwent intravitreal injection of antibiotics alone and in the Early Vitrectomy group received PPV with intravitreal antibiotics or intravitreal injection followed by PPV within 2 days of diagnosis. Patients were excluded if they had cataract surgery during the study, intravitreal steroids before endophthalmitis, or intermediate/posterior uveitis or cystoid macular edema. The study created a 1:1 matched cohort using Mahalanobis distance matching, accounting for the differences in VA at baseline and diagnosis.</div></div><div><h3>Main Outcome Measures</h3><div>Posttreatment logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) VA.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 1044 patients diagnosed with postinjection endophthalmitis met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. In the unmatched cohort, there were 935 patients in the Injection Only and 109 in the Early Vitrectomy group. In 1:1 matched cohort, 218 patients (109 in each group) were included; the median logMAR VAs were 0.32 (20/40–20/50) at baseline, 0.88 (∼20/150) at diagnosis, and 0.57 (20/70–20/80) posttreatment. There were no statistically significant differences in the visual outcomes between the 2 matched treatment groups (<em>b</em> = 0.05; <em>P</em> = 0.23); including the subgroup of patients with VA worse than 1.0 logMAR (<em>b</em> = 0.05; <em>P</em> = 0.452).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>There was no significant difference in final VA outcomes between patients receiving Injection Only and those treated with Early Vitrectomy for postinjection endophthalmitis. The findings support the use of either treatment strategy.</div></div><div><h3>Financial Disclosure(s)</h3><div>Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":19501,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmology. Retina","volume":"9 3","pages":"Pages 224-231"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmology. Retina","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S246865302400424X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

To determine if intravitreal injection of antibiotics alone versus early pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) plus injection of intravitreal antibiotics predicted better or worse visual outcomes for patients with endophthalmitis after anti-VEGF injections.

Design

Retrospective cohort study.

Participants

Patients developing endophthalmitis after receiving an intravitreal anti-VEGF injection from the American Academy of Ophthalmology IRIS® (Intelligent Research in Sight) Registry between 2016 and 2020.

Methods

Inclusion criteria were endophthalmitis diagnosis within 1 to 28 days after anti-VEGF injection and a recorded visual acuity (VA) at baseline, on the day of diagnosis, and posttreatment. Patients in the Injection Only group underwent intravitreal injection of antibiotics alone and in the Early Vitrectomy group received PPV with intravitreal antibiotics or intravitreal injection followed by PPV within 2 days of diagnosis. Patients were excluded if they had cataract surgery during the study, intravitreal steroids before endophthalmitis, or intermediate/posterior uveitis or cystoid macular edema. The study created a 1:1 matched cohort using Mahalanobis distance matching, accounting for the differences in VA at baseline and diagnosis.

Main Outcome Measures

Posttreatment logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) VA.

Results

A total of 1044 patients diagnosed with postinjection endophthalmitis met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. In the unmatched cohort, there were 935 patients in the Injection Only and 109 in the Early Vitrectomy group. In 1:1 matched cohort, 218 patients (109 in each group) were included; the median logMAR VAs were 0.32 (20/40–20/50) at baseline, 0.88 (∼20/150) at diagnosis, and 0.57 (20/70–20/80) posttreatment. There were no statistically significant differences in the visual outcomes between the 2 matched treatment groups (b = 0.05; P = 0.23); including the subgroup of patients with VA worse than 1.0 logMAR (b = 0.05; P = 0.452).

Conclusions

There was no significant difference in final VA outcomes between patients receiving Injection Only and those treated with Early Vitrectomy for postinjection endophthalmitis. The findings support the use of either treatment strategy.

Financial Disclosure(s)

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
玻璃体内抗生素与早期玻璃体切除术加玻璃体内抗生素治疗注射后眼内炎:IRIS® 登记(Intelligent Research in Sight)。
目的:确定单纯玻璃体内注射抗生素与早期玻璃体旁切除术(PPV)加玻璃体内注射抗生素相比,对注射抗血管内皮生长因子(anti-VEGF)后患有眼内炎的患者而言,视觉预后是好还是坏:设计:回顾性队列研究 参与者:2016年至2020年期间接受美国眼科学会IRIS®注册中心的玻璃体内抗血管内皮生长因子注射后发生眼内炎的患者:纳入标准:抗血管内皮生长因子注射后 1-28 天内确诊眼内炎,基线、确诊当天和治疗后记录视力 (VA)。仅注射组患者仅进行了抗生素的玻璃体内注射,而早期玻璃体切除术组患者在确诊后 2 天内接受了 PPV 和玻璃体内抗生素或玻璃体内注射,然后进行 PPV。如果患者在研究期间接受过白内障手术、在眼底病发生前接受过玻璃体内类固醇治疗或患有中度/后部葡萄膜炎或囊样黄斑水肿,则被排除在外。研究采用马哈拉诺比斯距离匹配法建立了 1:1 的匹配队列,考虑了基线和诊断时 VA 的差异:结果:1044 名诊断为注射后眼内炎的患者符合纳入和排除标准。在非匹配队列中,仅注射组有 935 名患者,早期玻璃体切割组有 109 名患者。在 1:1 匹配队列中,共纳入 218 名患者(每组 109 名);基线时的中位 logMAR VAs 为 0.32 [20/40-20/50],诊断时为 0.88 [∼20/150],治疗后为 0.57 [20/70-20/80]。两个匹配治疗组之间的视力结果差异无统计学意义(b = 0.05,p = 0.23);包括视力差于 1.0 logMAR 的亚组患者(b = 0.05,p = 0.452):结论:仅接受注射治疗的患者与接受早期玻璃体切割术治疗的注射后眼内炎患者的最终视力结果没有明显差异。研究结果支持采用这两种治疗策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ophthalmology. Retina
Ophthalmology. Retina Medicine-Ophthalmology
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
274
审稿时长
33 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信