Jaemin Kim, Hyoung Seok Kim, Su Jin Yoo, Moon Jung Choi, Youngju Lew, Jong Woo Kim, Han Joo Cho
{"title":"即时玻璃体切除术治疗手活动或更好视力的急性眼内炎。","authors":"Jaemin Kim, Hyoung Seok Kim, Su Jin Yoo, Moon Jung Choi, Youngju Lew, Jong Woo Kim, Han Joo Cho","doi":"10.3341/kjo.2022.0014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To determine the efficacy of immediate pars plana vitrectomy as the primary treatment for acute endophthalmitis in patients with a visual acuity (VA) of hand motion (HM) or better.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 149 patients who were referred to a single center for acute endophthalmitis after cataract surgery over the 13-year study period were retrospectively analyzed. Only patients presenting with a VA of at least HM were included. Patients were initially treated with either primary vitrectomy or intravitreal antibiotic injection alone, and their visual outcomes and reintervention rates after initial treatment were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant difference in the proportion of good (final VA ≥20 / 40) and poor (VA ≤ counting finger) visual outcomes between the groups. However, subgroup analysis of patients with a VA of HM (92 eyes) showed that the incidence of reintervention (14 of 72 eyes [19.4%] vs. 9 of 20 eyes [45.0%]) and poor visual outcomes (10 of 72 eyes [13.9%] vs. 8 of 20 eyes [40.0%]) were lower after prompt vitrectomy than after intravitreal antibiotic injection alone (p = 0.019 and p = 0.022, respectively). For those with a VA of at least counting finger, no significant difference was observed between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For patients with endophthalmitis presenting with a VA of HM, performing a prompt vitrectomy reduced the incidence of reintervention and poor visual outcomes than the administration of intravitreal antibiotics alone. Our results suggest that primary vitrectomy for patients with endophthalmitis presenting with a VA of HM could be more beneficial than intravitreal antibiotic injection alone.</p>","PeriodicalId":17883,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of Ophthalmology : KJO","volume":" ","pages":"390-397"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/ba/65/kjo-2022-0014.PMC9582504.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Immediate Vitrectomy for Acute Endophthalmitis in Patients with a Visual Acuity of Hand Motion or Better.\",\"authors\":\"Jaemin Kim, Hyoung Seok Kim, Su Jin Yoo, Moon Jung Choi, Youngju Lew, Jong Woo Kim, Han Joo Cho\",\"doi\":\"10.3341/kjo.2022.0014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To determine the efficacy of immediate pars plana vitrectomy as the primary treatment for acute endophthalmitis in patients with a visual acuity (VA) of hand motion (HM) or better.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 149 patients who were referred to a single center for acute endophthalmitis after cataract surgery over the 13-year study period were retrospectively analyzed. Only patients presenting with a VA of at least HM were included. Patients were initially treated with either primary vitrectomy or intravitreal antibiotic injection alone, and their visual outcomes and reintervention rates after initial treatment were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant difference in the proportion of good (final VA ≥20 / 40) and poor (VA ≤ counting finger) visual outcomes between the groups. However, subgroup analysis of patients with a VA of HM (92 eyes) showed that the incidence of reintervention (14 of 72 eyes [19.4%] vs. 9 of 20 eyes [45.0%]) and poor visual outcomes (10 of 72 eyes [13.9%] vs. 8 of 20 eyes [40.0%]) were lower after prompt vitrectomy than after intravitreal antibiotic injection alone (p = 0.019 and p = 0.022, respectively). For those with a VA of at least counting finger, no significant difference was observed between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For patients with endophthalmitis presenting with a VA of HM, performing a prompt vitrectomy reduced the incidence of reintervention and poor visual outcomes than the administration of intravitreal antibiotics alone. Our results suggest that primary vitrectomy for patients with endophthalmitis presenting with a VA of HM could be more beneficial than intravitreal antibiotic injection alone.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17883,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Korean Journal of Ophthalmology : KJO\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"390-397\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/ba/65/kjo-2022-0014.PMC9582504.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Korean Journal of Ophthalmology : KJO\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3341/kjo.2022.0014\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/8/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of Ophthalmology : KJO","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3341/kjo.2022.0014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/8/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Immediate Vitrectomy for Acute Endophthalmitis in Patients with a Visual Acuity of Hand Motion or Better.
Purpose: To determine the efficacy of immediate pars plana vitrectomy as the primary treatment for acute endophthalmitis in patients with a visual acuity (VA) of hand motion (HM) or better.
Methods: A total of 149 patients who were referred to a single center for acute endophthalmitis after cataract surgery over the 13-year study period were retrospectively analyzed. Only patients presenting with a VA of at least HM were included. Patients were initially treated with either primary vitrectomy or intravitreal antibiotic injection alone, and their visual outcomes and reintervention rates after initial treatment were compared.
Results: There was no significant difference in the proportion of good (final VA ≥20 / 40) and poor (VA ≤ counting finger) visual outcomes between the groups. However, subgroup analysis of patients with a VA of HM (92 eyes) showed that the incidence of reintervention (14 of 72 eyes [19.4%] vs. 9 of 20 eyes [45.0%]) and poor visual outcomes (10 of 72 eyes [13.9%] vs. 8 of 20 eyes [40.0%]) were lower after prompt vitrectomy than after intravitreal antibiotic injection alone (p = 0.019 and p = 0.022, respectively). For those with a VA of at least counting finger, no significant difference was observed between the groups.
Conclusions: For patients with endophthalmitis presenting with a VA of HM, performing a prompt vitrectomy reduced the incidence of reintervention and poor visual outcomes than the administration of intravitreal antibiotics alone. Our results suggest that primary vitrectomy for patients with endophthalmitis presenting with a VA of HM could be more beneficial than intravitreal antibiotic injection alone.