19 research outputs found
Predictive value and applicability of ocular trauma scores and pediatric ocular trauma scores in pediatric globe injuries
AIM: To evaluate the predictive value and applicability of Ocular Trauma Score (OTS) and Pediatric Ocular Trauma Score (POTS) for closed and open globe injuries in the pediatric group. METHODS: A retrospective study of closed and open globe injuries in children age of 0-18-year-old between 2012-2019 was conducted. Medical records were collected, and injuries were classified using Birmingham Eye Trauma Terminology System (BETTS). The predictive value and applicability of both OTS and POTS to final visual acuity (VA) were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 84 patients, 59 (70.2%) presented with closed globe injuries (CGI) and 25 (29.8%) with open globe injuries (OGI). The mean of initial VA was 0.832±0.904 logMAR. OTS and POTS was calculated. Initial VA (P<0.001) and traumatic cataract (P<0.001) were significantly associated with visual outcome, followed by organic/unclean wound (P=0.001), delay of surgery (P=0.001), iris prolapse (P=0.003), and globe rupture (P=0.008). A strong correlation between OTS and POTS and final VA (r=-0.798, P<0.001; r=-0.612, P<0.001) was found. OTS was more applicable in all age group of pediatric and in contrast to POTS, it was designed for 0-15 years old. POTS requires eleven parameters and OTS six parameters. Even though initial VA was not available, we could still calculate into POTS equation. CONCLUSION: OTS and POTS are highly predictive prognostic tools for final VA in CGI and OGI's in children
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
Recommended from our members
Global Current Practice Patterns for the Management of Open Globe Injuries
To determine global current practice patterns for the management of open globe injuries and identify areas of variation.
Cross-sectional survey.
An online survey assessed global management paradigms for open globe injuries from August 2020 to January 2021. Responses were collected from experts at eye trauma centers and emergency departments worldwide who manage ≥1 open globe injury per month. The survey assessed the use/selection of antibiotics and steroids, procedural and imaging decisions, and admission practices for open globe injuries.
Responses were received from representatives of 36 of 42 institutions (85.7%), of which 33 (78.6%) had sufficient trauma volume to be included. Included responses were distributed across North America (n=12, 36.4%), Asia (n=12, 36.4%), South America (n=4, 12.1%), Africa (n=3, 9.1%), Europe (n=1, 3.0%), and Australia (n=1, 3.0%). Preoperative systemic antibiotics for open globe injuries were administered by 75.8% (n = 25/33) of institutions, while 30.3% (n = 10/33) administered preoperative topical antibiotics. Intraoperative ophthalmic antibiotics for open globe injuries were used by 54.5% (n = 18/33) of experts. Most institutions also administered postoperative systemic antibiotics (n = 23 [69.7%]) and topical steroids (n = 29 [87.9%]), although specific medication choices diverged. At 19 responding centers (61.3% of the 31 that had trainees), residents participated in surgical repairs. Many institutions discharged patients after repair, but 54.5% (n = 18/33) of locations routinely admitted them for observation.
Preferred management practices for open globe injuries vary widely. To ensure the highest standard of care for all patients, evidence-based international guidelines for the treatment of these injuries are needed
Recommended from our members
Global Preferred Practice Patterns for the Management of Exogenous Endophthalmitis: A Survey by the American Society of Ophthalmic Trauma.
OBJECTIVE
: To investigate the global practice patterns for the management of exogenous endophthalmitis.
METHODS
: This cross-sectional study was conducted to assess global practice patterns for the management of exogenous endophthalmitis. An online survey comprised of questions regarding the management of exogenous endophthalmitis was distributed to institutions who are members of International Globe and Adnexal Trauma Epidemiology Study Group (IGATES) or invited affiliates of the American Society of Ophthalmic Trauma and the Asia Pacific Ophthalmic Trauma Society. Responses were gathered from August 2020 to January 2021.
RESULTS
Of 42 institutions, 36 responses were received (86% response rate), of which 33 (79%) were included in the analysis. Included centers were from Asia (36%), North America (36%), South America (12%), Africa (9%), Europe (3%), and Australia (3%). Oral antibiotics were administered in 19 (58%) institutions, with moxifloxacin as the preferred agent (n=9, 27%). The preferred method for obtaining cultures was vitreous tap (n=25, 76%). Most institutions (n=26, 79%) routinely administered intravitreal vancomycin and ceftazidime, while intravitreal steroids were routinely administered at 11 centers (33%). Indications for performing vitrectomy included; decreased visual acuity (n=14, 39%); all cases of exogenous endophthalmitis (n=4, 12%); non-response to medical therapy (n=4, 12%); or no view of the fundus (n=4, 12%), indicating significant variation in surgical indications. More than half (n=17, 52%) of responding institutions routinely admitted patients with exogenous endophthalmitis to the hospital. Institutions in the United States were less likely to administer oral antibiotics (27% vs. 73%, P = 0.024) and to admit patients (9% vs. 73%, P < 0.001) compared to other countries.
CONCLUSIONS
: This study highlights the global variations in the management of exogenous endophthalmitis, especially as it pertains to surgical indications. Further establishment of evidence-based guidelines may be beneficial to provide more uniform guidance to optimize outcomes