Prophylaxis of acute posttraumatic bacterial endophthalmitis with or without combined intraocular antibiotics: a prospective, double-masked randomized pilot study

Soheilian, Masoud; Rafati, Nasrin; Peyman, Gholam A.

doi:10.1023/b:inte.0000006768.66170.c1

Cited by 34 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…21 Further treatments involve injection of gentamycin and amikacin/clindamycin to eliminate bacteria that may have been introduced from surgery. 22 However, these antibiotics do not have as broad a coverage of bacteria as PVP-I, lack antiviral activity, can lead to bacterial resistance, and are expensive. 23 Additionally, because it is not practical to tap a patient's vitreal fluid for culture, it is preferable to prophylactically treat a patient at the time of operation with an antibiotic or antiseptic that has coverage of all possible pathogens.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Intravitreally Injected Povidone-Iodine onStaphylococcus epidermidisin Rabbit Eyes

Trost

Kivilcim²,

Peyman³

et al. 2007

Journal of Ocular Pharmacology and Therapeutics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Intravitreally Injected Povidone-Iodine onStaphylococcus epidermidisin Rabbit Eyes

Trost

Kivilcim²,

Peyman³

et al. 2007

Journal of Ocular Pharmacology and Therapeutics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies of penetrating injuries (including those with IOFB) have failed to show a statistically significant benefit of prophylactic intraocular antibiotics. 21,23 In a recent study of 55 cases of IOFB sustained by US military personnel, no patients received intravitreal antibiotics and there were no cases of endophthalmitis. 20 The use of prophylactic intravitreal antibiotics when there is a delay of 24 h or more in removing the IOFB has been proposed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surveillance of intraocular foreign bodies in the UK

Imrie

Cox

Foot

et al. 2007

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims To estimate the incidence of penetrating injuries with retained intraocular foreign bodies (IOFBs) in the United Kingdom, and to provide epidemiological data on the aetiology, management, and visual outcome of such injuries. Methods Cases were identified prospectively by active surveillance through the British Ophthalmological Surveillance Unit reporting card system, for the 12-month period June 2004 to May 2005 inclusive. Questionnaire data were obtained from UK ophthalmologists at presentation and 6 months following presentation. Results Data were available on 97 patients at presentation and 95 patients at follow-up. The minimum estimated incidence of IOFBs in the United Kingdom identified in this study was 0.16 per 100 000. All patients were male. Hammering was the most common mechanism of injury, occurring in 62% of patients. The IOFB was found in the anterior segment in 24%, the posterior segment in 73%, and involved both segments in 3%. Endophthalmitis was diagnosed in 9% of patients. Best-corrected visual acuity of the injured eye at final follow-up was 6/12 or better in 67%, 6/18 to 6/60 in 11%, and worse than 6/60 in 22%. Prognostic factors for a poor visual outcome included poor visual acuity at presentation, prolapse of intraocular tissue, development of endophthalmitis, development of retinal detachment, and large size of IOFB. Conclusions The incidence of IOFB in the United Kingdom appears to have reduced compared to previous studies. The majority of patients (67%) retain good visual acuity in the injured eye; however, a significant minority (22%) sustain long-term severe visual loss.

show abstract

“…4 Testing for anaerobes in cases of ocular trauma must not be overlooked because infections with such pathogens may be uncommon but do progress rapidly, leading to panophthalmitis and permanent visual loss. 6 Studies of in vitro activity against Gram-positive anaerobes, including C. perfringens, show that fusidic acid has good activity against nearly all species, with 90% minimum inhibitory concentrations mostly ,1 mg/L. 7 To our knowledge, there is no other published case of C. perfringens corneal ulcer treated with topical fusidic acid.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%