Chlorhexidine for ocular antisepsis before intravitreal injection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IF 5.1 2区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Charles Zhang , Daniel Lai , Daniel Zhu , Charles Palka , Andrew Reynolds , Nicolas Yannuzzi
{"title":"Chlorhexidine for ocular antisepsis before intravitreal injection: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Charles Zhang ,&nbsp;Daniel Lai ,&nbsp;Daniel Zhu ,&nbsp;Charles Palka ,&nbsp;Andrew Reynolds ,&nbsp;Nicolas Yannuzzi","doi":"10.1016/j.survophthal.2025.01.013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Povidone-iodine (PI) is the gold standard for pre-intravitreal injection ocular antisepsis. Chlorhexidine (CHX) is an emerging alternative with less ocular irritation. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate post-injection endophthalmitis rates with the use of CHX compared to PI. A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Scopus was performed for studies published between January 1, 2000 and February 21, 2024. Data on the number of injections and endophthalmitis cases were analyzed. A sample-size weighted mean difference (MD) meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.1, p &lt; 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Five studies including 230,656 injections were pooled to determine an endophthalmitis rate of 0.0003 [95 % CI, 0.0001–0.0005] with preinjection CHX antisepsis. Three studies included an additional PI branch and thus were used for secondary meta-analysis comparing CHX against PI. The analysis consisted of 185,799 injections in the CHX group and 269,441 injections in the PI group. No significant difference in the weighted relative risk of endophthalmitis with CHX was found (RR = 1.27 [95 %CI 0.50–3.22], p = 0.62). A total of 24 and 31 cases of culture-positivity were recorded in the CHX and PI groups respectively but no significant difference in weighted means was found (RR = 1.42[95 %CI 0.96–2.12], p = 0.08). This meta-analysis disclosed that the rate of post-IVI endophthalmitis while using CHX antisepsis is approximately 1 in 3937 injections, compared to 1 in 3906 with PI. CHX was not associated with a significant difference in the rate of endophthalmitis or culture-positivity compared to PI.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":22102,"journal":{"name":"Survey of ophthalmology","volume":"70 4","pages":"Pages 676-684"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Survey of ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0039625725000244","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Povidone-iodine (PI) is the gold standard for pre-intravitreal injection ocular antisepsis. Chlorhexidine (CHX) is an emerging alternative with less ocular irritation. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate post-injection endophthalmitis rates with the use of CHX compared to PI. A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Scopus was performed for studies published between January 1, 2000 and February 21, 2024. Data on the number of injections and endophthalmitis cases were analyzed. A sample-size weighted mean difference (MD) meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.1, p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Five studies including 230,656 injections were pooled to determine an endophthalmitis rate of 0.0003 [95 % CI, 0.0001–0.0005] with preinjection CHX antisepsis. Three studies included an additional PI branch and thus were used for secondary meta-analysis comparing CHX against PI. The analysis consisted of 185,799 injections in the CHX group and 269,441 injections in the PI group. No significant difference in the weighted relative risk of endophthalmitis with CHX was found (RR = 1.27 [95 %CI 0.50–3.22], p = 0.62). A total of 24 and 31 cases of culture-positivity were recorded in the CHX and PI groups respectively but no significant difference in weighted means was found (RR = 1.42[95 %CI 0.96–2.12], p = 0.08). This meta-analysis disclosed that the rate of post-IVI endophthalmitis while using CHX antisepsis is approximately 1 in 3937 injections, compared to 1 in 3906 with PI. CHX was not associated with a significant difference in the rate of endophthalmitis or culture-positivity compared to PI.
氯己定用于玻璃体内注射前的眼部消毒:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。
聚维酮碘(PI)是玻璃体注射前眼部消毒的金标准。氯己定(CHX)是一种新兴的替代品,眼部刺激较小。本荟萃分析旨在评估注射后使用CHX与PI的眼内炎发生率。对2000年1月1日至2024年2月21日之间发表的研究进行了PubMed, Embase和Scopus的系统搜索。分析了注射次数和眼内炎病例的数据。采用RevMan 5.4.1进行样本量加权平均差(MD) meta分析,p < 0.05为差异有统计学意义。五项研究共纳入230,656次注射,以确定注射前CHX防腐剂的眼内炎发生率为0.0003 [95% CI, 0.0001-0.0005]。三项研究包括一个额外的PI分支,因此用于比较CHX和PI的二次荟萃分析。该分析包括CHX组的185,799次注射和PI组的269,441次注射。CHX组眼内炎的加权相对危险度差异无统计学意义(RR = 1.27 [95%CI 0.50-3.22], p = 0.62)。CHX组和PI组分别有24例和31例培养阳性,但加权平均值差异无统计学意义(RR = 1.42[95%CI 0.96-2.12], p=0.08)。该荟萃分析显示,注射CHX杀菌剂时ivi后眼内炎的发生率约为1 / 3937,而注射PI时为1 / 3906。与PI相比,CHX与眼内炎或培养阳性的发生率无显著差异。
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
Survey of ophthalmology
Survey of ophthalmology 医学-眼科学
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
2.00%
发文量
138
审稿时长
14.8 weeks
期刊介绍: Survey of Ophthalmology is a clinically oriented review journal designed to keep ophthalmologists up to date. Comprehensive major review articles, written by experts and stringently refereed, integrate the literature on subjects selected for their clinical importance. Survey also includes feature articles, section reviews, book reviews, and abstracts.
×
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