Topical antibiotic prophylaxis before intravitreal injections: a pilot study

PURPOSE

To explore whether topical antibiotic prophylaxis in patients scheduled for intravitreal injections achieves surface sterility in a greater proportion of subjects as compared to povidone-iodine alone.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A randomized, triple-blind clinical trial.

POPULATION

patients scheduled for intravitreal injections for maculopathy.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

any sex and race, age 18 years and above. Subjects were randomized into 4 groups: the first group applied chloramphenicol (CHLORAM), the second netilmicin (NETILM), the third a commercial ozonized antiseptic solution (OZONE), and the fourth applied no drops (CONTROL).

OUTCOME VARIABLE

percentage of non-sterile conjunctival swabs. Specimens were collected before and after the application of 5% povidone-iodine moments before the injection.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight subjects (33.7% females, 64.3% males), mean age: 70.2 ± 9.3 years (54-91). Before povidone-iodine, both the CHLORAM and NETILM group showed a lower percentage of non-sterile swabs (61.1% and 31.3% respectively), as compared to the OZONE (83.3%) and CONTROL (86.5%) groups (p < .04). However, this statistical difference was lost after the application of povidone-iodine for 3 min. Percentage of non-sterile swabs in each group after applying 5% povidone-iodine: CHLORAM 11.1%, NETILM 12.5%, CONTROL 15.4%, OZONE 25.0%. This was not statistically significant (p > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Topical antibiotic prophylaxis with chloramphenicol or netilmicin drops decreases the bacterial load on the conjunctiva. However, after the application of povidone-iodine, all groups showed a significant reduction in the percentage of non-sterile swabs, and this value was comparable among all groups. For this reason, authors conclude that povidone-iodine alone is sufficient and prior topical antibiotic prophylaxis is not indicated.

SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: implications in the management of patients with colorectal cancer

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has already reached 3,207,248 patients with more than 225,000 deaths all over the world. Colorectal cancer is the third most diagnosed cancer worldwide, and the healthcare system is struggling to manage daily activities for elective cancer surgery. This review integrates clinical, microbiological, architectural and surgical aspects to develop indications on strategies to manage colorectal cancer patients and ensure safety during the pandemic. Telephone or virtual clinics must be encouraged and phone follow-up should be implemented. Indications for surgery must be rigorous, balancing the advantage of early surgical treatment and risks of treatment delay. To decrease the occupancy rate of intensive care unit beds, elective surgical treatment should be delayed until local endemic control, according to stage of disease. Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection should be treated only after clinical recovery, two consecutive negative oropharyngeal swabs and, if available, a negative stool sample. Before any elective oncologic procedure, a multidisciplinary oncologic team including an anaesthesiologist and an infectious disease specialist must assess every patient to evaluate the risk of infection and its impact on perioperative morbidity, mortality and oncologic prognosis. The hospital should organise to manage all elective oncologic patients in an 'infection-free' area or refer them to a non-SARS-CoV-2 hospital.