4.4 Article

Safety of Receiving Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Intravitreal Injection in Office-Based vs Operating Room Settings A Meta-analysis

期刊

JAMA OPHTHALMOLOGY
卷 139, 期 10, 页码 1080-1088

出版社

AMER MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2021.3096

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Major Scientific and Technological Special Project for Significant New Drugs Development [2019ZX09301113]
  2. National Nature Science Foundation of China [81730026]
  3. Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality [19495800700, 19YF1439800]
  4. Scientific Project of Shanghai Municipal Health Commission [201940151]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated the safety outcomes of IVI with anti-VEGF agents in the office vs OR setting, finding a higher rate of culture-positive EO in the office setting. Overall, the rate of clinically suspected or culture-positive EO following anti-VEGF IVIs was low in both settings, but bacterial spectrum could differ between the two.
IMPORTANCE Compared with the operating room (OR), office-based intravitreal injection (IVI) is considered a more cost-effective and convenient approach, yet clinical outcomes of IVIs with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents in different settings (office-based vs OR) have not been systematically evaluated. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the safety outcomes of IVI with anti-VEGF agents in the OR vs office-based setting. DATA SOURCES PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to July 2020. STUDY SELECTION Eligible studies reporting on patients who received IVIs with anti-VEGF drugs with a clearly stated injection setting of the office or OR. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Ameta-analysis was conducted to determine the rates of endophthalmitis (EO) and culture-positive EO. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Rates of EO and culture-positive EO following anti-VEGF IVIs in the OR and office-based setting. RESULTS Thirty-one studies with a total of 1 275 815 injections were included. Comparative analysis suggested no difference between rates of EO after IVIs performed in the office and OR settings (odds ratio, 3.06; 95% CI, 0.07-139.75; P=.57; I-2 = 80%) were identified, yet a higher rate of culture-positive EO was found in the office setting (odds ratio, 21.52; 95% CI, 2.39-193.55; P=.006; I-2 = 0%). The pooled rates of EO following anti-VEGF IVIs were 0.03% (95% CI, 0.03-0.04) and 0.02%(95% CI, 0.01-0.04) in office and OR settings, respectively, and the pooled rates of culture-positive EO were 0.01% (95% CI, 0.01-0.02) and 0.01% (95% CI, 0-0.02). The pooled rates of other ocular and systemic adverse events were low. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The rate of clinically suspected or culture-positive EO following anti-VEGF IVIs was low whether the procedure was performed in the office or OR setting. Bacterial spectrum could differ between the 2 settings. This meta-analysis could not determine if it is more appropriate to give treatment in the OR for safety reasons in low-income compared with higher-income regions in the world.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据