Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Department of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Acta Ophthalmol. 2024 Feb;102(1):e11-e21. doi: 10.1111/aos.15719. Epub 2023 Jun 21.
In this meta-analysis, we aim to compare the efficacy and safety of pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) versus tap-and-inject (TAI) of intravitreal antibiotics for the management of endophthalmitis secondary to intravitreal injections of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents. A systematic literature search was conducted on Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central (January 2005-October 2022). The primary analysis compared initial PPV versus TAI and the secondary analysis examined the efficacy and safety of TAI alone compared to TAI followed by PPV. The quality of non-randomized observational studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The quality of the evidence was assessed for each outcome. A random effects meta-analysis was performed. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals were reported. Of the 7474 screened studies, nine studies reporting on 153 eyes were included. The change in mean best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) between endophthalmitis presentation and last follow-up did not significantly differ between the initial TAI versus PPV groups (WMD = 0.05 units; 95% CI -0.12 to 0.22; p = 0.59; heterogeneity p = 0.41). The difference in pre- to post-treatment mean BCVA did not significantly differ between eyes that received TAI alone or TAI followed by PPV (WMD = 0.04 units; 95% CI -0.42 to 0.51; p = 0.85; heterogeneity p = 0.74). While the meta-analysis revealed no significant difference in the change in BCVA between PPV and TAI to treat endophthalmitis secondary to anti-VEGF agents, the quality of evidence was low with potential for confounding and selection bias. Further well-designed studies in this setting are needed.
在这项荟萃分析中,我们旨在比较玻璃体切割术(PPV)与玻璃体腔内抗生素注射(TAI)治疗抗血管内皮生长因子(VEGF)药物玻璃体内注射后眼内炎的疗效和安全性。我们在 Ovid MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 Cochrane Central 上进行了系统的文献检索(2005 年 1 月至 2022 年 10 月)。主要分析比较了初始 PPV 与 TAI,次要分析比较了单独 TAI 与 TAI 后行 PPV 的疗效和安全性。使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评估非随机观察性研究的质量。评估了每个结局的证据质量。采用随机效应荟萃分析。报告了具有 95%置信区间的加权均数差(WMD)。在筛选出的 7474 项研究中,有 9 项研究报告了 153 只眼的数据。在眼内炎发作和最后一次随访之间,初始 TAI 与 PPV 组之间平均最佳矫正视力(BCVA)的变化没有显著差异(WMD=0.05 个单位;95%CI-0.12 至 0.22;p=0.59;异质性 p=0.41)。单独接受 TAI 或 TAI 后行 PPV 的眼治疗前后平均 BCVA 的差异没有显著差异(WMD=0.04 个单位;95%CI-0.42 至 0.51;p=0.85;异质性 p=0.74)。虽然荟萃分析显示,在治疗抗 VEGF 药物玻璃体内注射后眼内炎时,PPV 与 TAI 之间 BCVA 的变化没有显著差异,但证据质量较低,存在混杂和选择偏倚的可能性。在这种情况下,需要进一步进行设计良好的研究。