The Use of Preoperative Prophylactic Systemic Antibiotics for the Prevention of Endopthalmitis in Open Globe Injuries:A Meta-Analysis

Topic:This study reports the effect of systemic prophylactic antibiotics (and their route) on the risk of endophthalmitis after open globe injury. Clinical relevance:Endophthalmitis is a major complication of open globe injury, it can lead to rapid sight loss in the affected eye. The administration of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis is common practice in some health care systems, although there is no consensus on their use. PubMed, CENTRAL, Web of Science, CINAHL and Embase were searched. This was completed 6th July 2021 and updated 10th Dec 2022. We included randomised and non-randomised prospective studies which reported the rate of post-open globe injury endophthalmitis, when systemic pre-operative antibiotic prophylaxis (via the oral or intravenous route) was given. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and ROBINS-I tool were used for assessing the risk of bias. Where meta-analysis was performed results were reported as odds ratio. PROSPERO registration: CRD42021271271. Three studies were included. One prospective observational study compared outcomes of patients who had received systemic or no systemic pre-operative antibiotics. The endophthalmitis rates reported were 3.75% and 4.91% in the systemic and no systemic pre-operative antibiotics groups, a non-significant difference (p = 0.68). Two randomised controlled trials were included (1,555 patients). The rates of endophthalmitis were 17 events in 751 patients (2.26%) and 17 events in 804 patients (2.11%) in the oral antibiotics and intravenous (+/- oral) antibiotics groups, respectively. Meta-analysis demonstrated no significant differences between groups (OR 1.07 [95% confidence interval 0.54 – 2.12]). The incidences of endophthalmitis after open globe injury were low with and without systemic antibiotic prophylaxis, although high risk cases were excluded in the included studies. When antibiotic prophylaxis is considered, there is moderate evidence that oral antibiotic administration is non-inferior to intravenous

The Risk of Sympathetic Ophthalmia Associated with Open-Globe Injury Management Strategies:A Meta-analysis

Topic: Sympathetic ophthalmia (SO) is a sight-threatening granulomatous panuveitis caused by a sensitizing event. Primary enucleation or primary evisceration, versus primary repair, as a risk management strategy after open-globe injury (OGI) remains controversial.Clinical Relevance: This systematic review was conducted to report the incidence of SO after primary repair compared with that of after primary enucleation or primary evisceration. This enabled the reporting of an estimated number needed to treat.Methods: Five journal databases were searched. This review was registered with International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (identifier, CRD42021262616). Searches were carried out on June 29, 2021, and were updated on December 10, 2022. Prospective or retrospective studies that reported outcomes (including SO or lack of SO) in a patient population who underwent either primary repair and primary enucleation or primary evisceration were included. A systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Random effects modelling was used to estimate pooled SO rates and absolute risk reduction (ARR).Results: Eight studies reporting SO as an outcome were included in total. The included studies contained 7500 patients and 7635 OGIs. In total, 7620 OGIs met the criteria for inclusion in this analysis; SO developed in 21 patients with OGI. When all included studies were pooled, the estimated SO rate was 0.12% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.00%–0.25%) after OGI. Of 779 patients who underwent primary enucleation or primary evisceration, no SO cases were reported, resulting in a pooled SO estimate of 0.05% (95% CI, 0.00%–0.21%). For primary repair, the pooled estimate of SO rate was 0.15% (95% CI, 0.00%–0.33%). The ARR using a random effects model was −0.0010 (in favour of eye removal; 95% CI, −0.0031 [in favor of eye removal] to 0.0011 [in favor of primary repair]). Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations analysis highlighted a low certainty of evidence because the included studies were observational, and a risk of bias resulted from missing data.Discussion: Based on the available data, no evidence exists that primary enucleation or primary evisceration reduce the risk of secondary SO.Financial Disclosure(s): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article

Brazilian Flora 2020: Leveraging the power of a collaborative scientific network

International audienceThe shortage of reliable primary taxonomic data limits the description of biological taxa and the understanding of biodiversity patterns and processes, complicating biogeographical, ecological, and evolutionary studies. This deficit creates a significant taxonomic impediment to biodiversity research and conservation planning. The taxonomic impediment and the biodiversity crisis are widely recognized, highlighting the urgent need for reliable taxonomic data. Over the past decade, numerous countries worldwide have devoted considerable effort to Target 1 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (GSPC), which called for the preparation of a working list of all known plant species by 2010 and an online world Flora by 2020. Brazil is a megadiverse country, home to more of the world's known plant species than any other country. Despite that, Flora Brasiliensis, concluded in 1906, was the last comprehensive treatment of the Brazilian flora. The lack of accurate estimates of the number of species of algae, fungi, and plants occurring in Brazil contributes to the prevailing taxonomic impediment and delays progress towards the GSPC targets. Over the past 12 years, a legion of taxonomists motivated to meet Target 1 of the GSPC, worked together to gather and integrate knowledge on the algal, plant, and fungal diversity of Brazil. Overall, a team of about 980 taxonomists joined efforts in a highly collaborative project that used cybertaxonomy to prepare an updated Flora of Brazil, showing the power of scientific collaboration to reach ambitious goals. This paper presents an overview of the Brazilian Flora 2020 and provides taxonomic and spatial updates on the algae, fungi, and plants found in one of the world's most biodiverse countries. We further identify collection gaps and summarize future goals that extend beyond 2020. Our results show that Brazil is home to 46,975 native species of algae, fungi, and plants, of which 19,669 are endemic to the country. The data compiled to date suggests that the Atlantic Rainforest might be the most diverse Brazilian domain for all plant groups except gymnosperms, which are most diverse in the Amazon. However, scientific knowledge of Brazilian diversity is still unequally distributed, with the Atlantic Rainforest and the Cerrado being the most intensively sampled and studied biomes in the country. In times of “scientific reductionism”, with botanical and mycological sciences suffering pervasive depreciation in recent decades, the first online Flora of Brazil 2020 significantly enhanced the quality and quantity of taxonomic data available for algae, fungi, and plants from Brazil. This project also made all the information freely available online, providing a firm foundation for future research and for the management, conservation, and sustainable use of the Brazilian funga and flora