4.6 Article

Bacterial endophthalmitis prophylaxis for cataract surgery - An evidence-based update

Journal

OPHTHALMOLOGY
Volume 109, Issue 1, Pages 13-24

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0161-6420(01)00899-5

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To assess commonly used cataract surgery bacterial endophthalmitis prophylaxis techniques based on a systematic literature review and evidence rating. Clinical Relevance. Prophylactic techniques to decrease the risk of bacterial endophthalmitis related to cataract surgery are commonly used, but the evidence justifying their use is unclear. Literature Reviewed: A MEDLINE search of the literature published in English or with English abstracts from 1966 to 2000 was performed using various combinations of relevant key words. Eighty-eight peer-reviewed papers were identified and judged worthy of review on the basis of predefined criteria. Results: No prophylactic technique received the highest of three possible clinical recommendations (A, crucial to clinical outcome). Preoperative povidone-iodine preparation received the intermediate clinical recommendation (8, moderately important to clinical outcome). All other reported prophylactic interventions, including postoperative subconjunctival antibiotic injection, preoperative lash trimming, preoperative saline irrigation, preoperative topical antibiotics, antibiotic-containing irrigating solutions, and the use of intraoperative heparin, received the lowest clinical recommendation (C, possibly relevant but not definitely related to clinical outcome) based on weak and often conflicting evidence justifying their use. Conclusions: With regard to bacterial endophthalmitis prophylaxis in cataract surgery, current literature most strongly supports the use of preoperative povidone-iodine antisepsis. (C) 2002 by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available