Post-intravitreal injection endophthalmitis pattern during the COVID-19 pandemic with implementation of patients' masking

Endophthalmitis: a bibliometric study and visualization analysis from 1993 to 2023

Aims

This study is designed to generalize and depict the research hotspots of endophthalmitis through bibliometric methods and software and analyze the evolutive tendency of the work on this severe disease over the past 30 years.

Methods

This study employed a rigorous bibliometric approach. We identified all endophthalmitis-related literature by conducting a comprehensive search of the Science Citation Index Expanded database under the Web of Science Core Collection. The data was then analyzed and visualized using CiteSpace and VOSviewer, two widely recognized software tools in the field of bibliometrics. CiteSpace was used to analyze the country distributions, dual map overlay of journals, keyword bursts, and co-cited references. VOSviewer was employed to describe the authors and co-cited authors, the journals, the co-cited journals, and the keywords co-occurrence network. This robust methodology ensures the reliability and validity of the study's findings.

Results

A total of 2960 publications, including 2695 articles and 265 reviews, were included in this bibliometric study. There has been no shortage of endophthalmitis-related publications since 1993, with an apparent upward trend during recent years. Possible correlations with the COVID-19 pandemic are also analyzed. These studies were finished by 11,048 authors from 75 countries worldwide, with the United States in the lead. In the keyword co-occurrence network, except for the endophthalmitis term, cataract surgery becomes the keyword with the highest frequency. Different categories of endophthalmitis, including postoperative, post-injection, post-traumatic, and endogenous endophthalmitis, and antibacterial and anti-inflammatory therapies of infectious endophthalmitis, are discussed by categories. From the perspective of the timeline, postoperative and post-injection endophthalmitis were the dominant forms before and after the year 2000, respectively. Co-citation analyses reveal that the Endophthalmitis Vitrectomy Study (EVS) conducted in 1995 provides pivotal guidance for later research. Diverse pathogenic bacteria (e.g., Coagulase-negative Staphylococci, Propionibacterium acnes, Viridians Streptococci, and Bacillus cereus) or fungi (e.g., Candida, Aspergillus, and Fusarium) contribute to varying treatment principles and clinical prognosis, which should be taken seriously. In addition, intravitreal and intracameral antibiotics are the mainstay for treating and preventing infectious endophthalmitis, respectively.

Conclusion

Our bibliometric analysis provides an overview of dynamic evolution and structural relationships in the research field of endophthalmitis. The displayed hotspots and developmental directions have reference values for future investigation.

NO EFFECT OF REAL-WORLD UNIVERSAL FACE MASKING ON POST-INTRAVITREAL INJECTION ENDOPHTHALMITIS RATE AT A SINGLE TERTIARY ACADEMIC CENTER

PURPOSE

To determine whether universal masking during COVID-19 altered rate and outcomes of postinjection endophthalmitis.

METHODS

Retrospective, single-site, comparative, cohort study. Eyes diagnosed with endophthalmitis within 4 weeks of intravitreal injection at the University of Michigan from August 1, 2012, to November 15, 2022, were identified. Cases were considered "masking" between March 15, 2020, and November 15, 2022. Endophthalmitis rate, visual acuity, and microbial spectrum were investigated.

RESULTS

There were 20 postinjection endophthalmitis cases out of 72,194 injections (0.028%; one in 3,571 injections) premasking and 10 of 38,962 with universal masking (0.026%; one in 3,846 injections; odds ratio 0.9; 95% [confidence interval]: 0.4-2.0). Referral from the community was unchanged with 32 cases referred premasking (0.35 cases/month) and 10 cases with masking (0.31 cases/month). Presenting mean the logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution visual acuity with masking of all postinjection endophthalmitis cases trended worse (2.35 ± 0.40) compared with premasking (2.09 ± 0.48; P = 0.05) with light perception visual acuity more common with masking (31.6% vs. 10.9%, P = 0.06). There was no delay in time from procedure to initial treatment ( P = 0.36), no difference in the rate of initial treatment with tap and inject (T/I), and similar positive-culture rates ( P = 0.77) between the cohorts. Visual acuity after 30 days of follow-up was clinically unchanged (∼20/500 vs. 20/400; P = 0.59).

CONCLUSION

Universal masking had no effect on postinjection endophthalmitis rate or on the rate of culture-positive cases. Although presenting visual acuity appeared worse with masking, this was not statistically significant, and current treatment paradigms resulted in similar visual outcomes.

Comparison of Endophthalmitis Rates after Alcohol-Based Chlorhexidine and Povidone-Iodine Antisepsis for Intravitreal Injections

OBJECTIVE

Intravitreal injections (IVIs) are the most frequently performed intraocular procedure in Canada. Povidone-iodine (PI) is the current gold standard for antisepsis for IVI and is widely used; chlorhexidine (CH) is a possible alternative antiseptic agent. This study aims to compare rates of endophthalmitis after IVI with 0.05% chlorhexidine with a 4% alcohol base antisepsis to rates of endophthalmitis after IVI with 10% PI antisepsis.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SUBJECTS

Eyes that received IVI between May 2019 and October 2022 at a group retina practice in Edmonton, Canada.

METHODS

Eyes at a single center received focal conjunctival application of either 10% PI antisepsis or 0.05% CH in 4% alcohol antisepsis for 30 seconds before each IVI.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Rates of endophthalmitis between the PI and CH groups.

RESULTS

A total of 170 952 IVIs were performed during the study period. A total of 31 135 were performed using CH prophylaxis compared with 139 817 with PI prophylaxis. Among all IVIs there were 49 total cases of endophthalmitis, 29 in the PI group (0.021%) and 20 in the CH group (0.064%). There was a statistically significant difference in the rates of endophthalmitis between the 2 groups (P < 0.001). The odds ratio for developing endophthalmitis with CH antisepsis was 3.1 (95% confidence interval, 1.9-5.2) compared with PI antisepsis. There were increased odds of developing endophthalmitis with aflibercept injection compared with bevacizumab (odds ratio, 3.48; 95% confidence interval, 2.09-7.24).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a statistically significant difference in rates of endophthalmitis between alcohol-based CH and PI antisepsis for IVI in our patient population utilizing the methods discussed. In our center, alcohol-based CH is now considered a second-line antiseptic agent. Further studies are warranted to further assess the endophthalmitis rate utilizing these 2 antiseptic agents.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S)

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Impact of Prefilled Syringes and Masking on Postintravitreal Injection Endophthalmitis

Purpose: To compare rates of endophthalmitis (1) following intravitreal injection of antivascular endothelial growth factor therapies with glass-vial preparation (GVP) vs prefilled syringes (PFS) and (2) before and after masking protocols were implemented. Methods: Medical records within a multicenter retina practice in Houston, Texas, from January 2015 to August 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. The primary outcome was rate of endophthalmitis after intravitreal injection. Results: A total of 307 349 injections were performed during the study period and 101 cases of endophthalmitis were identified (0.033%). PFS use was associated with a decreased risk of endophthalmitis (relative risk [RR], 0.320; 95% CI, 0.198-0.518, P < .001); 54 cases of endophthalmitis occurred in the GVP group of aflibercept and ranibizumab (0.052%) compared with 24 in the PFS group (0.017%). There was no difference in the endophthalmitis rates with or without universal masking (RR, 0.953; 95% CI 0.616-1.473, P = .91). Discussion: PFS use was associated with a significant reduction in the rate of endophthalmitis while the use of surgical face masks did not appear to significantly impact the rate of endophthalmitis.