Timing of Povidone-Iodine Application to Reduce the Risk of Endophthalmitis after Intravitreal Injections

Risk of Endophthalmitis Based on Cumulative Number of Anti-VEGF Intravitreal Injections

PURPOSE

To determine the risk of endophthalmitis in eyes undergoing intravitreal injections (IVIs) of anti-VEGF based on cumulative number of injections per eye.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients from a single center undergoing IVIs of ranibizumab, aflibercept, or bevacizumab.

METHODS

Eyes were divided into quartiles based on injection number causative of endophthalmitis between January 1, 2011, and June 1, 2022.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Interquartile clinical outcomes and cumulative risk of endophthalmitis per injection and per eye.

RESULTS

A total of 43 393 eyes received 652 421 anti-VEGF injections resulting in 231 endophthalmitis cases (0.035% per injection, 1 in 2857), of which 215 were included. The cumulative endophthalmitis risk increased from 0.0018% (1 in 55 556) after 1 injection to 0.013% (1 in 7692) after 11 injections (0.0012 percentage point change), versus 0.014% (1 in 7143) after 12 injections to 0.025% (1 in 4000) after 35 injections (0.00049 percentage point change), versus 0.025% (1 in 4000) after 36 injections to 0.031% (1 in 3226) after 66 injections (0.00017 percentage point change), versus 0.031% (1 in 3226) after 63 injections to 0.033% (1 in 3030) after 126 injections (0.000042 percentage point change) (P < 0.001). Likewise, the cumulative endophthalmitis risk per eye increased from 0.028% (1 in 3571) to 0.20% (1 in 500) between injections 1 and 11 (0.018 percentage point change), versus 0.21% (1 in 476) to 0.38% (1 in 263) between injections 12 and 35 (0.0075 percentage point change), versus 0.38% (1 in 263) to 0.46% (1 in 217) between injections 36 and 66 (0.0026 percentage point change), versus 0.46% (1 in 217) to 0.50% (1 in 200) between injections 67 and 126 (0.00063 percentage point change) (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The cumulative endophthalmitis risk per injection and per eye increased with greater number of injections received but appeared to do so at a higher rate during earlier injections and at a lower rate further into the treatment course.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S)

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

In praise of povidone-iodine application in ophthalmology

Polyvinyl pyrrolidone or povidone-iodine (PVP-I) is a water-soluble complex formed by the combination of iodine and a water-soluble polymer, polyvinyl pyrrolidone. This complex exerts bactericidal, fungicidal, and virucidal action by gradually releasing free iodine at the site of application to react with pathogens. In ophthalmology, PVP-I is used as a disinfectant and antiseptic agent for preoperative preparation of the skin and mucous membranes and for treating contaminated wounds. PVP-I has been shown to reduce effectively the risk of endophthalmitis in various ocular procedures, including cataract surgery and intravitreal injections; however, it has also been used in the treatment of conjunctivitis, keratitis, and endophthalmitis, with promising results especially in low-resource situations. PVP-I has been associated with complications such as postoperative eye pain, persistent corneal epithelial defects, ocular inflammation, and an attendant risk of keratitis. In cases of poor PVP-I tolerance, applying PVP-I at lower concentrations or using alternative antiseptics such as chlorhexidine should be considered. We provide an update on the efficacy of PVP-I in the prophylaxis and treatment of conjunctivitis, keratitis, and endophthalmitis and a comprehensive analysis of the current literature regarding the use of PVP-I in the management of these ocular conditions. Also, PVP-I-related adverse effects and toxicities and its alternatives are discussed. The goal is to present a thorough evaluation of the available evidence and to offer practical recommendations for clinicians regarding the therapeutic usage of PVP-I in ophthalmology.

Outcomes of a Multicenter 10-Year Review of Postinjection Endophthalmitis and Associated Systemic Medical Comorbidities

Purpose: To investigate whether any systemic medical conditions may be associated with a higher risk for developing postinjection endophthalmitis. Methods: This case-control study is a retrospective review within the Emory Eye Center from 2009 to 2019 and The Cleveland Clinic Foundation from 2012 to 2019. Each case was matched in a 1:4 case-to-control ratio. The associations between medical comorbidities and endophthalmitis were explored using multivariable logistic regression models on the combined sample. Results: Sixty-six individuals were diagnosed with injection-associated endophthalmitis. Systemic immunocompromised status was found to be a risk factor associated with developing endophthalmitis with an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 3.17 (P = .009). Other conditions with increased risk approaching statistical significance included a history of pulmonary disease (aOR, 1.74; P = .08) and a history of smoking (aOR, 1.72; P = .06). Conclusions: This is the first report to our knowledge demonstrating that immunocompromised status is associated with an increased risk for developing postinjection endophthalmitis. While this study may be limited due to its retrospective nature, the result may nevertheless serve as a guidance for risk counseling. Future analysis using a large-scale database will be needed.

FACE MASK CONTAMINATION DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIA. A STUDY ON PATIENTS RECEIVING INTRAVITREAL INJECTIONS

PURPOSE

To investigate the bacterial growth in the surgical face masks used by patients who received intravitreal injections and study the effect of povidone-iodine on the periocular area (PA) of masks.

METHODS

Forty patients who attended for intravitreal injections were divided in those with less (<4 hours) and more (>4 hours) than 4 hours of mask use. Each group was divided depending on the application or not of povidone-iodine in the PA of the mask. Bacterial load was studied on PA and mouth area samples.

RESULTS

The bacterial load in the PA was higher in the >4 hours group compared with the <4 hours group (13.2 vs. 48.75 colony-forming units/μL; P = 0.03). The contamination in the PA significantly decreased after applying povidone-iodine in the >4 hours group (P = 0.01). The use or not of povidone-iodine was strongly correlated to a positive culture (OR = 9.0, P = 0.00. CI 1.63-49.44).

CONCLUSION

Surgical face masks worn for more than 4 hours present higher contamination in the PA than those with less use. Bacterial load in the PA is reduced with povidone-iodine on masks used for more than 4 hours. This contamination should be considered in the asepsis protocol of intravitreal injections.

[Postoperative endophthalmitis-a review of literature]

Postoperative endophthalmitis is one of the most feared complications for ophthalmologists, and the number of infections after intraocular procedures have been increasing. Nonetheless, a prompt intervention can result in the recovery of vision. In the past, endophthalmitis after cataract surgery was accountable for the majority of cases but is becoming less frequent due to the progress of surgical techniques and demographic developments with a steadily increasing number of intravitreal injections. In this article, the different forms of postoperative endophthalmitis are assessed in terms of pathophysiology and their specific characteristics depending on their etiology.

Endophthalmitis following Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapy: Changes in Incidence and Outcomes over a 9-Year Period

Aims: To evaluate whether the incidence, microbial spectrum, and visual outcomes of endophthalmitis following intravitreal injections have changed over time.Methods: Retrospective cohort study of endophthalmitis in eyes receiving intravitreal injection of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor between 2009-2012 and 2016-2017 at a single, large retina practice.Results: A total of 283,315 injections resulted in 96 suspected infectious endophthalmitis cases. Comparing 2009-2012 and 2016-2017, the rate of suspected endophthalmitis changed from 1 in 2,663 injections to 1 in 3,195 injections (p = .37). Visual outcomes 6 months after endophthalmitis were significantly better during the latter period (p = .04), with an average loss of 6.3 lines of VA in 2009-2012 compared to a loss of 3.6 lines in 2016-2017. In multivariate analysis, a "no-talking" policy during injections resulted in a trend towards a decrease in endophthalmitis incidence (p = .08). Cessation of post-injection topical antibiotic use did not independently decrease endophthalmitis incidence (p = .24) when the effect of a "no-talking" policy was taken into account. A lower rate of endophthalmitis was seen after prefilled vs. conventionally prepared ranibizumab syringe use for injection (0.014% vs. 0.035%, respectively), though this difference did not meet statistical significance (p = .16).Conclusion: The incidence of endophthalmitis after intravitreal injection decreased and visual outcomes improved between the periods of 2009-2012 and 2016-2017. A "no-talking" policy during injections was associated with a trend toward a decrease in endophthalmitis rate.

Effectiveness of immediate vitrectomy and intravitreal antibiotics for post-injection endophthalmitis

PURPOSE

To show that an immediate vitrectomy with an intravitreal injection of antibiotics can be an effective approach for the treatment of acute endophthalmitis following intravitreal injections.

METHODS

We reviewed all cases of clinical endophthalmitis caused by an intravitreal injection that were treated in our department between March 2012 and November 2019. Only patients that underwent a vitrectomy within 6 h after presentation to the clinic and with a documented visual acuity shortly before the causative event were included. Baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) before the causative event was compared to BCVA measured within a follow-up period of 8 months (up to 14 months).

RESULTS

In total, 30 eyes of 30 patients were included. The BCVA before the intraocular infection was a mean value of 0.55 logMAR, and the BCVA on the day of the endophthalmitis decreased significantly to 1.66 logMAR. Within 2 months following the pars plana vitrectomy (PPV), the mean BCVA improved to 0.83 logMAR. Eight months following PPV (mean value, 8.20 months; SD, 3.59 months), the mean BCVA was 0.63 logMAR. In the last follow-up interval most of the eyes recovered, and the BCVA did not differ significantly from baseline. Two eyes underwent further pars plana surgery during the follow-up period. No enucleation was required.

CONCLUSION

In this study, we have shown that an immediate vitrectomy with subsequent intravitreal injection of antibiotics is an effective option for treating post-injection endophthalmitis and frequently results in recovery of vision; thus, it should be performed as early as possible, where available.

Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events in Gene Therapy Trials for Inherited Retinal Diseases: A Narrative Review

Patient safety is a primary priority in the conduction of retinal gene therapy trials. An understanding of risk factors and mitigation strategies for post-procedure complications is crucial for the optimization of gene therapy clinical trial protocols. In this review, we synthesize the literature on ocular delivery methods, vector platforms, and treatment-emergent adverse effects in recent gene therapy clinical trials for inherited retinal diseases.

Prophylaxis measures for postinjection endophthalmitis

Intravitreal injections have become the most commonly performed ophthalmic procedure, transforming modern retina practice. Postinjection endophthalmitis, while rare, remains the most feared potential complication. Prophylaxis measures including topical antisepsis, hand hygiene, gloves, masks, and drapes have all been proposed to help prevent postinjection endophthalmitis; however, there remains significant variation in protocol, given the lack of agreement among retina specialists on which steps are crucial to prevent endophthalmitis. With millions of injections performed annually, collating data have helped us better understand risk factors for endophthalmitis after intravitreal injection. We summarize the consensus guidelines for intravitreal injection technique and comprehensively review the literature on prevention of postinjection endophthalmitis.

Real-World Trends in Intravitreal Injection Practices among American Retina Specialists

PURPOSE

To analyze practice patterns used for intravitreal injections (IVIs) by retinal specialists in the United States.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional online survey.

PARTICIPANTS

Retina specialists in the United States who responded to a web-based survey.

METHODS

Retinal specialists in the United States were contacted via e-mail to complete a web-based, anonymous, 24-question survey. Multivariate analysis was performed on a selected question of interest focused on choice of anesthetic used for IVI.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Differences in IVI practices, such as antibiotic preferences, and different odds of anesthetic use by demographic variables with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

A total of 281 retinal specialists responded to the survey (17% response rate). Respondents' average age was 53 years, with an average of 20 years in practice. Respondents practiced in 42 states, with 90% practicing in an urban or suburban area. For anesthesia, 14% used a topical anesthetic with cotton swab compression, 27% used a subconjunctival anesthetic, and 31% used an anesthetic gel. Age, gender, geographic location, and practice setting did not seem to impact choice of anesthetic for IVI significantly. Sixty-six percent of respondents always use a lid speculum, 21% administer topical antibiotics before injection, 36% wear a mask, 73% wear gloves, and 45% always dilate the eyes before injection. Most respondents use a 30-gauge needle and inject in the inferior temporal quadrant (70%). Forty-five percent always perform bilateral injections the same day if indicated. After the injection, 14% administer post operative nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, 28% administer postoperative antibiotics, and 31% routinely check intraocular pressure after injection.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provided real-world trends in practices for IVI among retina specialists in the United States. In addition, age, gender, practice type, and geographic location did not influence anesthetic choice for IVI.

Extraocular and Intraocular Infections Following Strabismus Surgery: A Review

An extensive literature review of various types of infections following strabismus surgery was facilitated by using the search engines PubMed and Google Scholar. In both search engines, the phrases "infection following strabismus surgery," "infection strabismus surgery," "complications of strabismus surgery," "endophthalmitis strabismus surgery," and "strabismus scleral perforation" were used for the review. The type of infection, surface involved, and site of the infection determined the type of therapy. Infections involving deeper tissues, such as periocular infection or orbital cellulitis, required systemic therapy. Sub-Tenon's abscesses required incision and drainage, as well as systemic antibiotics. The development of endophthalmitis following strabismus surgery was rare, but was usually devastating to the visual result. Symptoms of an adverse intraocular condition began by mean postoperative day 3, but the definitive diagnosis and treatment of endophthalmitis was not made until mean postoperative day 6. Despite early detection of this latter type of infection and early surgical intervention with vitreous paracentesis and intraocular injection of antibiotics, the visual result was extremely poor in more than two-thirds of the reported cases. Although there is no known way to truly prevent all infections following strabismus surgery, several techniques may be prudent for the strabismus surgeon to adopt to decrease the bacterial load and minimize the risk of infection. The surgeon should be encouraged to consider preoperative use of povidone-iodine on the operative field and avoid scleral perforation during surgery. [J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2019;56(4):214-221.].