Pars plana vitrectomy in the management of patients diagnosed with endophthalmitis following intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injection

Intravitreal Antibiotics versus Early Vitrectomy plus Intravitreal Antibiotics for Post-Injection Endophthalmitis: an IRIS® Registry (Intelligent Research in Sight)

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-vascular endothelial growth factor (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® 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 post-treatment. 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

Post-treatment logMAR VA RESULTS: 1,044 patients diagnosed with post-injection 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] post-treatment. There were no statistically significant differences in the visual outcomes between the two 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 post-injection endophthalmitis. The findings support the use of either treatment strategy.

POSTINTRAVITREAL INJECTION AND POSTCATARACT EXTRACTION ENDOPHTHALMITIS VISUAL OUTCOMES BY ORGANISM: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

PURPOSE

To compare visual outcomes of endophthalmitis following intravitreal injections (IVIs) and cataract extraction by causative organism.

METHODS

Searches in Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase identified articles reporting visual outcomes by causative organisms in post-IVI and cataract extraction endophthalmitis cases from January 2010 to February 2022. A random-effects meta-analysis compared visual improvement among endophthalmitis cases caused by causative organisms.

RESULTS

Eighty-five out of 3,317 retrieved studies were included. The highest degree of visual acuity improvement in both post-IVI and postcataract extraction endophthalmitis was seen in cases caused by coagulase-negative staphylococci, followed by gram-negative organisms and other gram-positive organisms such as streptococci and enterococci. Culture-negative cases showed more visual acuity improvement than culture-positive cases in post-IVI endophthalmitis. These results remained consistent when accounting for endophthalmitis treatment, IVI type, condition requiring IVI treatment, follow-up period, and initial preprocedural visual acuity.

CONCLUSION

Coagulase-negative staphylococci and gram-negative organisms show the most visual acuity improvement in both post-IVI and postcataract extraction endophthalmitis. Other gram-positive organisms such as streptococci and enterococci are associated with less visual improvement. This updated systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that the results of the Endophthalmitis Vitrectomy Study are consistent decades later despite advancements in surgical practices and the evolution of microorganisms over time.

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.

Clinical Practice Update: Management of Infectious Endophthalmitis After Intravitreal Anti-VEGF Injection

Although infectious endophthalmitis after intravitreal antivascular endothelial growth factor injections is rare, it is the most feared and potentially devastating complication of this procedure. There is no high-level evidence to provide definitive guidance on the management of endophthalmitis occurring after intravitreal injection (IVI). This clinical practice update reviews the published literature regarding post-IVI endophthalmitis and highlights areas in which further research is needed to better guide its management.

The Role of Silicone Oil in the Surgical Management of Endophthalmitis: A Systematic Review

(1) Background: We aimed to systematically review the current literature to evaluate if in patients with postoperative endophthalmitis treated with pars plana vitrectomy, silicone oil tamponade could provide a useful contribution to the control and eradication of infection and if it could influence anatomical recovery and functional outcome. (2) Randomized controlled trials, cross-sectional studies, case series, and case reports published in the English language in peer-reviewed journals were included. No restriction was placed based on the study location. We used medical subject headings (MeSH) and text words. We searched MEDLINE (OVID and PubMed), Google Scholar, ISI Web of Science (Thom-on-Reuters), and the Cochrane Library (Wiley) from January 1995 to the present. To ensure literature saturation, we scanned the reference lists of included studies or relevant reviews identified through the search. Risk of Bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for longitudinal studies and Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. (3) Results: abstracts of 75 articles were selected for full-text reading; after full-text reading, 44 articles were taken into consideration in the systematic review. 5 out of 7 in vitro experimental studies demonstrated antimicrobial activity against different species of bacteria and fungi. The use of SO as endotamponade associated with PPV led to better visual acuity and a lower rate of retinal detachment and the need for additional surgery. (4) Conclusions: Silicone oil reduces the risk of postoperative retinal detachment, especially in case of undetected retinal breaks, produces compartmentalization of the eye, may lead to early visual recovery, allows laser photocoagulation, prevents severe postoperative hypotony and has antimicrobic activity due to an inhibitory effect for several species of pathogens. Concerns regarding possible toxic effects on the retina and optic disc, compartmentalization and impaired washout of pathogen toxins have been reported. It may also influence intravitreal antibiotic distribution and clearance.

Pars-plana-vitrectomy for endophthalmitis treatment and the role of standardized ultrasound

PURPOSE

Endophthalmitis is a severe inflammation following surgery or endogenous spread of pathogens. Besides clinical signs and symptoms, standardized ultrasound might help to confirm the diagnosis. Thus, we analyzed 172 cases of endophthalmitis for pathogens, visual acuity (VA) and the predictive value of standardized ultrasound.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of patients treated with pars-plana-vitrectomy for endophthalmitis at the University Eye Hospital was performed. Sex, age, VA at presentation, first day after surgery, four weeks postoperatively, and at last follow-up, as well as pathogen culture, and presence of standardized ultrasound before vitrectomy were recorded. Mann-Whitney U and Chi-square tests were used for groupwise comparisons.

RESULTS

A total of 172 patients (male = 47.7%) with a median age of 76 years (IQR 65-82 years) treated for endophthalmitis (exogenous = 85.5%) were included. Median follow-up time was 65 days (IQR 12-274 days). Visual acuity at presentation was 2.30 logMAR (IQR 2.70-2.30 logMAR); it increased to 1.00 logMAR (1.4-0.40 logMAR) at last follow-up. A total of 79 patients (45.9%) underwent standardized ultrasound before vitrectomy. Patients with positive ultrasound criteria had a significantly decreased VA at presentation (p = 0.034). Positive microbiological cultures for Streptococcus spp. and Enterococcus faecalis were associated with decreased VA (p = 0.028) at last follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Standardized ultrasound is an easy and robust tool in the diagnosis of endophthalmitis. Positive criteria are significantly associated with decreased VA at presentation. The recovery of VA depends on pathogens and is significantly worse for certain species (Streptococcus spp., Enterococcus faecalis).

Preventive factors, diagnosis, and management of injection-related endophthalmitis: a literature review

BACKGROUND

Intravitreal medication injections represent the gold standard treatment for a variety of potentially blinding chorioretinal vascular diseases. Despite their excellent safety profile, they are associated with the feared complication of injection-related endophthalmitis (IRE). Though the overall incidence of IRE is low, due to the ever-increasing number of injections being performed, it is a complication that all retina specialists are likely to encounter. This article reviews various factors that could potentially influence the risk of IRE and discusses evidence-based strategies for management.

METHOD

PubMed was searched for keywords "intravitreal injection" and "endophthalmitis" from the period of 1995-2021. Relevant articles were reviewed and selected articles were analyzed with respect to the incidence, potential preventive factors, clinical presentation, microbial profile, management, and outcomes for IRE.

RESULTS

There is strong consensus supporting the use of povidone iodine topical antiseptic, eyelid retraction away from the injection site, and avoiding treatment of eyes with active surface or eyelid disease, but there is less agreement on the use of face masks versus "no-talking" policies and optimal anesthetic technique. Current evidence comparing tap and inject or early vitrectomy for treatment of IRE is inadequate to determine an optimal treatment strategy.

CONCLUSION

Intravitreal injections are sight saving, but even using established prophylactic measures there remains a small but real risk of infectious injection-related complications. Further investigations comparing tap and inject versus vitrectomy may help to establish optimal treatment, although the rarity of IRE makes designing adequately powered prospective trials a difficult task.

Management Patterns and Outcomes for Intravitreal Injection–Related Endophthalmitis

Purpose:

This work describes the clinical management and outcomes in cases of presumed infectious endophthalmitis following intravitreal injection at a tertiary academic medical center.

Methods:

A retrospective review took place of eyes that presented to the Duke Eye Center over a 9-year period and were diagnosed with intravitreal injection–related endophthalmitis. Clinical presentation, management, microbiologic yield, visual outcomes, and complications were abstracted from medical records.

Results:

Of 23 eyes diagnosed with postinjection endophthalmitis, 52.2% underwent anterior chamber tap (33.3% of which first underwent dry needle vitreous tap), 47.8% underwent needle vitreous tap, 17.4% underwent neither, and none underwent pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for initial management. Subsequent PPV was performed in 6 eyes (26.1%). Mean visual acuity (VA) improved by 50 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters at 6 months. Eyes that underwent initial anterior chamber tap had worse presenting VA than those that did not ( P = .01). Eyes undergoing subsequent PPV had worse VA at presentation ( P = .02) and at 6 months ( P < .001). Eyes presenting with VA of hand motion (20/8000) or worse were more likely to undergo subsequent PPV ( P = .02).

Conclusions:

Eyes with intravitreal injection–related endophthalmitis presenting with VA of hand motion or worse were more likely to undergo subsequent PPV. Future studies with larger cohorts may reveal whether earlier vitrectomy should be considered in these patients.

Early Pars Plana Vitrectomy in Acute Endophthalmitis: The Manchester Series

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Current literature lacks good-quality evidence regarding the outcomes of early pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for acute exogenous endophthalmitis. The aim for this study was to analyze and discuss the outcomes of PPV for endophthalmitis in a UK tertiary hospital.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study was a retrospective case series. The clinical records of consecutive patients who had PPV for acute exogenous endophthalmitis were reviewed. Demographic data, etiology, timing of onset, timing of PPV, intraand postoperative complications, baseline and final best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), therapeutic regimens, and microbiology details were collected. Primary efficacy and safety outcome measures were BCVA improvement of two or more logMAR lines and intra- or postoperative complications, respectively.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients with a median age of 76 (interquartile range, 64 to 82) years were studied. The most common etiology was intravitreal injection (41%), followed by phacoemulsification (34%). Median interval to PPV was 1.0 (interquartile range, 1.0 to 3.0) days. In a multivariate model controlling for age, baseline BCVA, microbiology positivity, and etiology (post-intravitreal injection), PPV after 24 hours was seven times more likely to achieve significant BCVA improvement (odds ratio, 7.47; 95% confidence interval, 1.12 to 49.66; P = .038). PPV within 24 hours of presentation was associated with more intraoperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Favorable outcomes may be achieved with current antibiotic regimens and PPV for endophthalmitis. The series suggests that an early surgical intervention may be associated with poorer functional outcomes. Tap and inject at presentation, followed by a semi-urgent PPV as required, seems to be a sensible approach. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2022;53:96-102.].

Safety of Receiving Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Intravitreal Injection in Office-Based vs Operating Room Settings: A Meta-analysis

Importance

Compared with the operating room (OR), office-based intravitreal injection (IVI) is considered a more cost-effective and convenient approach, yet clinical outcomes of IVIs with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents in different settings (office-based vs OR) have not been systematically evaluated.

Objective

To evaluate the safety outcomes of IVI with anti-VEGF agents in the OR vs office-based setting.

Data Sources

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to July 2020.

Study Selection

Eligible studies reporting on patients who received IVIs with anti-VEGF drugs with a clearly stated injection setting of the office or OR.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. A meta-analysis was conducted to determine the rates of endophthalmitis (EO) and culture-positive EO.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Rates of EO and culture-positive EO following anti-VEGF IVIs in the OR and office-based setting.

Results

Thirty-one studies with a total of 1 275 815 injections were included. Comparative analysis suggested no difference between rates of EO after IVIs performed in the office and OR settings (odds ratio, 3.06; 95% CI, 0.07-139.75; P = .57; I2 = 80%) were identified, yet a higher rate of culture-positive EO was found in the office setting (odds ratio, 21.52; 95% CI, 2.39-193.55; P = .006; I2 = 0%). The pooled rates of EO following anti-VEGF IVIs were 0.03% (95% CI, 0.03-0.04) and 0.02% (95% CI, 0.01-0.04) in office and OR settings, respectively, and the pooled rates of culture-positive EO were 0.01% (95% CI, 0.01-0.02) and 0.01% (95% CI, 0-0.02). The pooled rates of other ocular and systemic adverse events were low.

Conclusions and Relevance

The rate of clinically suspected or culture-positive EO following anti-VEGF IVIs was low whether the procedure was performed in the office or OR setting. Bacterial spectrum could differ between the 2 settings. This meta-analysis could not determine if it is more appropriate to give treatment in the OR for safety reasons in low-income compared with higher-income regions in the world.

TAP AND INJECT VERSUS PARS PLANA VITRECTOMY FOR POSTPROCEDURAL ENDOPHTHALMITIS: A Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the visual outcomes after prompt pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with tap biopsy and intravitreal antimicrobial injection to treat postinjection and postsurgery endophthalmitis.

METHODS

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE, and Ovid Embase databases were searched for articles published between January 2010 and November 2020. Two independent reviewers selected articles and extracted data. We analyzed data in RevMan 5.3 and assessed methodological quality using the Cochrane ROBINS-I tool. The mean improvement in visual outcome was compared between PPV and intravitreal antimicrobial injection as a relative risk of improving ≥2 lines and a mean logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution difference in improvement.

RESULTS

Fifteen retrospective case series (1,355 eyes), of which 739 eyes (55%) received intravitreal antimicrobial injection and 616 (45%) received PPV as initial treatment, were included. The overall relative risk of improving 2 or more lines in PPV in comparison with intravitreal antimicrobial injection was 1.04 (95% CI 0.88-1.23; P = 0.61; I2 = 0%) with a mean difference of 0.04 (95% CI -0.18 to 0.27; P = 0.69; I2 = 0%). The results stayed robust when subgroup analysis based on causative procedure for endophthalmitis was performed.

CONCLUSION

Intravitreal antimicrobial injection is noninferior to PPV for the treatment of postcataract operation, postinjection, and post-PPV endophthalmitis.

VISUAL OUTCOME OF EARLY VITRECTOMY AND INTRAVITREAL ANTIBIOTICS IN ACUTE POSTSURGICAL AND POSTINTRAVITREAL INJECTION ENDOPHTHALMITIS: European Vitreo-Retinal Society Endophthalmitis Study Report Two

PURPOSE

To evaluate the visual outcome associated with intravitreal antibiotics (IVA) and pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) for acute postprocedure endophthalmitis.

METHODS

Data from 237 eyes presenting with acute postprocedure endophthalmitis were collected from 57 retina specialists in 28 countries. All eyes were treated with IVA on the day of presentation. We classified eyes according to the method of treatment used as IVA and early PPV (IVA + PPV within 1 week of presentation) groups.

RESULTS

After exclusion of ineligible eyes, data from 204 eyes were analyzed. The mean (SD) age of patients was 62.7 (21.8) years and 69.3 (12.7) years in the IVA and PPV groups, respectively (P = 0.18). Endophthalmitis secondary to cataract, intravitreal injections, PPV, and other intraocular procedures represented 64.2%, 16.2%, 13.7%, and 5.9% of cases, respectively. Intravitreal antibiotics alone were administered in 55 eyes (27.0%), and early PPV was performed in 149 eyes (73.0%). No difference was found between groups in the final visual acuity of ≥20/60 (43.6%, 65 eyes vs. 34.5%, 19 eyes) and ≤counting fingers (30.9%, 46 eyes vs. 36.4%, 20 eyes) for IVA versus early PPV groups, respectively. Vision of light perception (odds ratio = 12.2; 95% confidence interval: 2.0-72.6) and retinal detachment (odds ratio = 7.7; 95% confidence interval: 1.5-409) at baseline were predictive of vision of ≤counting fingers. Retinal detachment at baseline (odds ratio = 20.4; 95% confidence interval: 1.1-372.1) was predictive of final retinal detachment status.

CONCLUSION

The current retrospective multicenter cohort of eyes with acute postprocedure endophthalmitis reports similar outcomes after treatment with IVA alone when compared with IVA and early PPV within 1 week of presentation.

Inflammatory Complications of Intravitreal Anti-VEGF Injections

Intravitreal injection of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents is a commonly used therapy for numerous retinal diseases. The most commonly used of these medications are bevacizumab, ranibizumab, aflibercept, and brolucizumab. However, intravitreal administration of these agents is also associated with several inflammatory and non-inflammatory adverse events. The three inflammatory adverse events are sterile intraocular inflammation, brolucizumab-associated retinal vasculitis, and post-injection endophthalmitis. This narrative review summarizes the current literature regarding these conditions, including their epidemiology, presentation, management, outcomes, and pathogenesis. The inflammatory adverse events also share a number of overlapping features, which can make them difficult to discern from one another in a clinical context. This review discusses certain distinguishing features of these conditions that may aid providers in discerning between them and establishing the correct diagnosis.

Effectiveness of immediate vitrectomy and intravitreal antibiotics for post-injection endophthalmitis

PURPOSE

To show that an immediate vitrectomy with an intravitreal injection of antibiotics can be an effective approach for the treatment of acute endophthalmitis following intravitreal injections.

METHODS

We reviewed all cases of clinical endophthalmitis caused by an intravitreal injection that were treated in our department between March 2012 and November 2019. Only patients that underwent a vitrectomy within 6 h after presentation to the clinic and with a documented visual acuity shortly before the causative event were included. Baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) before the causative event was compared to BCVA measured within a follow-up period of 8 months (up to 14 months).

RESULTS

In total, 30 eyes of 30 patients were included. The BCVA before the intraocular infection was a mean value of 0.55 logMAR, and the BCVA on the day of the endophthalmitis decreased significantly to 1.66 logMAR. Within 2 months following the pars plana vitrectomy (PPV), the mean BCVA improved to 0.83 logMAR. Eight months following PPV (mean value, 8.20 months; SD, 3.59 months), the mean BCVA was 0.63 logMAR. In the last follow-up interval most of the eyes recovered, and the BCVA did not differ significantly from baseline. Two eyes underwent further pars plana surgery during the follow-up period. No enucleation was required.

CONCLUSION

In this study, we have shown that an immediate vitrectomy with subsequent intravitreal injection of antibiotics is an effective option for treating post-injection endophthalmitis and frequently results in recovery of vision; thus, it should be performed as early as possible, where available.

Klebsiella Cluster Endophthalmitis following Intravitreal Bevacizumab: Role of Early Detection, Pars Plana Vitrectomy, and Intracameral Moxifloxacin

AIM

To report the clinical profile, outcomes of early vitrectomy for cluster endophthalmitis developing after intravitreal Bevacizumab (IVB), and discuss the role of prophylactic intracameral moxifloxacin for eyes undergoing combined cataract surgery with IVB.

METHODS

Single center, retrospective analysis of 35 consecutive eyes developing post-IVB inflammation.

RESULTS

Of the 35 eyes that were administered IVB (27 eyes 'IVB alone' and 8 eyes 'IVB with cataract surgery'). Endophthalmitis developed in 28 eyes, 6 eyes were managed with Intravitreal antibiotic (IVAB) alone, while 22 eyes required early vitrectomy. Only one eye undergoing a combined phacoemulsification with IVB developed endophthalmitis. Majority(26/28) of the eyes achieved visual acuity equal to/greater than pre-IVB injection vision over a period of 3.15 ± 3.2 months.

CONCLUSION

Early detection and prompt PPV were effectual for achieving good functional outcomes in our cluster of post-IVB Klebsiella endophthalmitis. Intracameral moxifloxacin was protective in cases undergoing combined cataract surgery with IVB.

Value of Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Gene Therapy for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration

PURPOSE

To use discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis to estimate the value creation associated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) genetic therapy for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).

DESIGN

Economic analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults undergoing serial intravitreal anti-VEGF injections in 1 eye for nAMD.

METHODS

Discounted cash flow modeling with scenario analysis was used to derive a present value for a 1-time alternative treatment to lifelong anti-VEGF treatment for nAMD. Multiple sensitivity analyses were performed on the basis of patient age at time of first injection and frequency interval of intravitreal injection.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Present values of DCF and scenario analyses.

RESULTS

Discounted cash flow analysis of intravitreal anti-VEGF treatment for nAMD resulted in a base-case valuation of $208 420.61, $219 093.31, and $17 379.41 for a 1-time alternative treatment to aflibercept, ranibizumab, and bevacizumab, respectively. This figure covaried significantly with anti-VEGF agent according to the patient age at first injection ($78 323.19-$292 449.87) and frequency of injections ($148 422.91-$388 096.81). In addition, for bevacizumab, variability was driven by the hypothetical degree of clinical superiority of 1-time therapy to repeated intravitreal injections due to reduction in adverse events ($17 379.41-$18 250.79) or reduction in direct or indirect costs associated with age-related macular degeneration ($17 379.41-$657 406.55).

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-VEGF gene therapy approaches can create significantly different value propositions based on the agent modeled, patient age at first injection, frequency of injections, and clinical profile of the medication. Although the use of aflibercept or ranibizumab as a comparative cost metric is logical from a bioequivalence perspective, the disparity in medication costs should not be the primary value driver in applied models. Instead, bevacizumab should be the base case ($17 379.41), with additional value driven from an improvement in quality of life through clinical superiority. A reduction in direct and indirect costs can be used to approximate the value from maintained visual acuity, which is elaborated in the DCF analysis approach described in this article. This model can serve as a basis for assessing the price ceiling of myriad gene therapy approaches. Given the high present values for these therapeutics, innovative costing and reimbursement mechanisms should be further explored, with contingencies for sustained efficacy.

Prophylaxis measures for postinjection endophthalmitis

Intravitreal injections have become the most commonly performed ophthalmic procedure, transforming modern retina practice. Postinjection endophthalmitis, while rare, remains the most feared potential complication. Prophylaxis measures including topical antisepsis, hand hygiene, gloves, masks, and drapes have all been proposed to help prevent postinjection endophthalmitis; however, there remains significant variation in protocol, given the lack of agreement among retina specialists on which steps are crucial to prevent endophthalmitis. With millions of injections performed annually, collating data have helped us better understand risk factors for endophthalmitis after intravitreal injection. We summarize the consensus guidelines for intravitreal injection technique and comprehensively review the literature on prevention of postinjection endophthalmitis.

Changes in Management Based on Vitreous Culture in Endophthalmitis After Intravitreal Anti-vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Injection

PURPOSE

To assess whether vitreous culture results affect the clinical management of patients with acute endophthalmitis after intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injection.

DESIGN

Retrospective case series.

METHODS

Setting: Single-center.

STUDY POPULATION

Patients who developed endophthalmitis after intravitreal injection of aflibercept, bevacizumab, or ranibizumab between January 1, 2016, and May 31, 2018.

OBSERVATION

A change in clinical management was defined as additional intravitreal antibiotic injections or pars plana vitrectomy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

A change in clinical management within 2 weeks of initial endophthalmitis culture and treatment; visual acuity.

RESULTS

Of 204,986 intravitreal anti-VEGF injections performed, 60 cases (0.0293%) of endophthalmitis were identified, 18 of which were culture-positive. Six of 60 eyes (10%) had a change in clinical management. A change in clinical management was initiated in 3 of 18 (17%) culture-positive cases compared to 3 of 42 (7%) culture-negative cases (P = .357). Changes in management for culture-positive cases were performed based on declining vision (2 cases) and worsening clinical examination (1 case). Changes in management for culture-negative endophthalmitis cases were performed based on declining vision (1 case) and worsening clinical examination (2 cases). No additional interventions were initiated based on positive-culture results. Comparing vision loss from baseline by culture result, at final follow-up, oral flora-associated culture-positive cases lost 17.5 lines, non-oral flora-associated culture-positive cases lost 9.1 lines, and culture-negative cases lost 2.5 lines of vision (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Following endophthalmitis from intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF agents, vitreous culture data may help prognosticate visual outcomes but appear to have a limited effect on clinical management.

Endophthalmitis after Intravitreal Injection of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Inhibitors: Management and Visual Outcomes

PURPOSE

We describe the presentation of patients developing endophthalmitis after intravitreal injection with vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors. Moreover, we evaluate the management by comparing the outcomes of immediate tap and injection of intravitreal antibiotics (TAI) versus initial surgical pars plana vitrectomy (PPV). Finally, we analyze the predictive factors of visual outcomes at 6-month follow-up.

DESIGN

Retrospective, single-center, nonrandomized interventional study.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients developing endophthalmitis after receiving an intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF agent between 2006 and 2016.

METHODS

All patients received a vitreous biopsy sent for cultures before the initiation of treatment: TAI group versus PPV with intravitreal antibiotics (PPV group).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at 6-month follow-up after treatment for endophthalmitis.

RESULTS

A total of 258 357 intravitreal injections occurred over the course of the 10-year period, of which 40 patients (0.016%) had endophthalmitis within 3 weeks after injection. In total, 34 patients (85.0%) had pain and 25 patients (62.5%) had hypopyon on initial examination. Among 24 culture-positive cases, 66.7% of the causative organisms were coagulase-negative Staphylococcus, followed by Streptococcus species (10.0%). The best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR]) at 6-month follow-up was significantly worse for patients who had a positive culture for Streptococcus species (4.0; standard deviation [SD], 0.8) (approximately light perception) compared with those who had a positive culture for coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (0.4; SD, 0.3) (∼20/50) (P < 0.0001). Compared with the TAI group, a higher proportion of samples were culture-positive in the PPV group (90.9% vs. 48.3%, P = 0.03). There was no statistically significant difference in BCVA at 6-month follow-up between the TAI and PPV groups. Younger age (<85 years) and lower intraocular pressure (IOP) (≤25 mmHg) at presentation were predictive of achieving a BCVA of 20/400 or better at 6-month follow-up after treatment. Initial management (TAI vs. PPV), duration of symptoms, presence of pain, presence of hypopyon, presenting BCVA, and culture status (positive vs. negative) were not found to be predictive of visual outcomes at 6-month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant difference in BCVA at 6-month follow-up was detected between the TAI and PPV groups. Younger age and lower IOP at presentation were associated with better visual outcomes at 6-month follow-up.

Incidence of Endophthalmitis after Intravitreal Anti-vascular Endothelial Growth Factor: Experience in Saudi Arabia

PURPOSE

To report the incidence of endophthalmitis, the clinical and microbiological aspects, after intravitreal (IVT) injection of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor.

METHODS

A chart review was performed of patients diagnosed with endophthalmitis after receiving IVT injections of bevacizumab (Avastin) and ranibizumab (Lucentis) presenting to King Khaled Eye Specialist Hospital (KKESH) from May 2006 to December 2012. Endophthalmitis was diagnosed clinically as an intraocular infection with vitreous involvement that required treatment with IVT antibiotics or had undergone pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) to remove the suspected microorganism. Main outcome measures were the incidence of endophthalmitis and the clinical and microbiological features.

RESULTS

Seven cases of endophthalmitis were identified, there was 1 (0.004%) case of endophthalmitis of 22674 IVT injections performed at KKESH. All cases were after IVT bevacizumab. Three (42.85%) cases were culture-positive and caused by Staphylococcus epidermidis. The initial management was vitreous tap and IVT injection of antibiotics followed by PPV in 6 (85.7%) cases. One (14.3%) case underwent evisceration. Visual acuity improved at last visit in only 2 (28.6%) cases. The rate of endophthalmitis was 0.0004% for bevacizumab.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of endophthalmitis after IVT bevacizumab and ranibizumab was very low. We recommend following a standardized injection protocol, adherence to sterile techniques, and proper patient follow-up are determinant factors for low incidence rates. In addition, endophthalmitis after IVT bevacizumab and ranibizumab have poor visual outcomes despite prompt treatment.

Endophthalmitis following intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF agents: long-term outcomes and the identification of unusual micro-organisms

Background

While the development of targeted molecular therapy to inhibit vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) has revolutionized the treatment and visual prognosis of highly prevalent retinal diseases such as diabetic retinopathy and age-related macular degeneration, each intravitreal injection of these agents carries a small risk of endophthalmitis which can be visually devastating. In the absence of specific guidelines, current management of post-injection endophthalmitis is typically extrapolated from data regarding endophthalmitis occurring after cataract surgery despite potential differences in pathogenic organisms and clinical course. Here, we assess the contribution of intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF agents to all cases of endophthalmitis at our tertiary care referral center and characterize the clinical outcomes and microbial pathogens associated with post-injection endophthalmitis in order to inform management of this serious iatrogenic condition.

Results

During the 7-year study period analyzed, 199 cases of endophthalmitis were identified using billing records. Of these, the most common etiology was post-surgical, accounting for 62 cases (31.2 %), with bleb-associated, endogenous, and corneal ulcer-related infections representing the next most frequent causes, comprising 15.6 % (31/199), 13.1 % (26/199), and 13.6 % (27/199) of all cases, respectively. Intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF agents represented 8.5 % of endophthalmitis (17/199 cases). Intraocular cultures yielded positive results in 75 % of post-injection cases, with the majority associated with coagulase-negative Staphylococcus. Consistent with prior literature, a case of Strep viridans displayed more rapid onset and progression. We also report the first association of Enterobacter cloacae and Lactococcus garvieae with post-injection endophthalmitis. While all but one patient were treated with initial vitreous tap and intravitreal injection of antibiotics, both patients with these rare organisms exhibited persistent vitritis requiring subsequent vitrectomy. Long-term outcomes of post-injection endophthalmitis indicated visual recovery to baseline levels, even with resumption of anti-VEGF agents following resolution of the acute infection.

Conclusions

Acute endophthalmitis following intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF agents is an uncommon but potentially devastating complication which may be managed effectively with vitreous tap and injection of intravitreal antibiotics. However, persistent vitritis requiring subsequent vitrectomy should raise suspicion for unusual pathogens.

Endophthalmitis following intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injection: a comprehensive review

The purpose of this review is to report and summarize previously reported studies and assess many of the individual steps of the intravitreal injection procedure's possible effect on the prevention of endophthalmitis. The pooled endophthalmitis rate from 20 large retrospective case series of anti-VEGF injections was 144/510,396 (0.028%; 1/3,544). Injections may be performed in an office-based location or in an operating room (OR) and low rates of endophthalmitis can be achieved in either location with careful attention to asepsis. Pre- or post-injection topical antibiotics have not been shown to be effective, and could select for more virulent microorganisms. Povidone-iodine prior to injection is accepted as the gold-standard antiseptic agent, but aqueous chlorhexidine may be an alternative. Antisepsis before and after gel or subconjunctival anesthetic is suggested. The preponderance of Streptococcal infections after intravitreal injection is discussed, including the possible role of aerosolization, which can be minimized by using face masks or maintaining silence. As with other invasive procedures in medicine, the use of sterile gloves, following adequate hand antisepsis, may be considered. Control of the eyelashes and lid margin is required to avoid contamination of the needle, but this can be achieved with or without a speculum. Techniques to minimize vitreous reflux have not been shown to reduce the risk of endophthalmitis. Same day bilateral injections should be performed as two separate procedures, preferably using drug from different lots, especially when using compounded drugs.

Complications of subspecialty ophthalmic care: endophthalmitis after intravitreal injections of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor medications

The use of medications directed against vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) signaling has revolutionized the treatment of age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and many other retinal diseases in the last decade. However, the rapidly increasing use of these agents has led to a rise in treatment-associated complications. One of the most feared by patients and ophthalmologists is post-injection endophthalmitis, which can result in severe vision loss and, in rare cases, loss of the eye. The aim of this article is to review the incidence, clinical findings, risk factors, management, and visual outcomes in cases of endophthalmitis following intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF medications.

Endophthalmitis: state of the art

Endophthalmitis is an uncommon diagnosis but can have devastating visual outcomes. Endophthalmitis may be endogenous or exogenous. Exogenous endophthalmitis is caused by introduction of pathogens through mechanisms such as ocular surgery, open-globe trauma, and intravitreal injections. Endogenous endophthalmitis occurs as a result of hematogenous spread of bacteria or fungi into the eye. These categories of endophthalmitis have different risk factors and causative pathogens, and thus require different diagnostic, prevention, and treatment strategies. Novel diagnostic techniques such as real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have been reported to provide improved diagnostic results over traditional culture techniques and may have a more expanded role in the future. While the role of povidone-iodine in prophylaxis of postoperative endophthalmitis is established, there remains controversy with regard to the effectiveness of other measures, including prophylactic antibiotics. The Endophthalmitis Vitrectomy Study (EVS) has provided us with valuable treatment guidelines. However, these guidelines cannot be directly applied to all categories of endophthalmitis, highlighting the need for continued research into attaining improved treatment outcomes.

Prevention and treatment of injection-related endophthalmitis

BACKGROUND

Intravitreal injections are the fastest growing cause of endophthalmitis and can result in severe vision loss. The prevention, diagnosis and management of such infections remain unclear and at times controversial.

METHODS

We searched Pubmed for keywords "prophylaxis," "endophthalmitis," "intravitreal injection." We focused on studies published in the last 2 years as well as other recent studies with particular attention to data on the incidence, microbiology, prevention, and treatment of injection-related endophthalmitis.

RESULTS

Over 20 relevant studies were found. With povidone-iodine preparation, the per-injection endophthalmitis rate is low at about 0.03%. Antibiotics do not appear to be beneficial for prevention of post-injection endophthalmitis. The best timing of vitrectomy is unclear.

CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotic prophylaxis is probably not needed when giving intravitreal injections. More data is needed to help determine the proper treatment for post-injection endophthalmitis.

Endophthalmitis Associated with Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Injections

The use of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents has led to a dramatic increase in the number of intravitreal injections. Endophthalmitis remains a rare but potentially vision-threatening complication of intravitreal injections. Recent large series have estimated this risk to be about one in 3,000 injections or less. Bevacizumab, which is generally prepared by a compounding pharmacy, is associated with additional risks of contamination. Although endophthalmitis cannot be prevented in all cases, certain risk reduction strategies have been proposed, including the use of an eyelid speculum, povidone iodine, avoidance of needle contact with the eyelid margin or eyelashes, and avoidance of routine post-injection antibiotics. Despite these precautions, some patients will develop endophthalmitis following intravitreal anti-VEGF injections, and outcomes may be poor despite prompt and appropriate therapy.