↓ Skip to main content

Endophthalmitis following intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injection: a comprehensive review

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Retina and Vitreous , July 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
70 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Endophthalmitis following intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injection: a comprehensive review
Published in
International Journal of Retina and Vitreous , July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40942-015-0010-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rohan Merani, Alex P Hunyor

Abstract

The purpose of this review is to report and summarize previously reported studies and assess many of the individual steps of the intravitreal injection procedure's possible effect on the prevention of endophthalmitis. The pooled endophthalmitis rate from 20 large retrospective case series of anti-VEGF injections was 144/510,396 (0.028%; 1/3,544). Injections may be performed in an office-based location or in an operating room (OR) and low rates of endophthalmitis can be achieved in either location with careful attention to asepsis. Pre- or post-injection topical antibiotics have not been shown to be effective, and could select for more virulent microorganisms. Povidone-iodine prior to injection is accepted as the gold-standard antiseptic agent, but aqueous chlorhexidine may be an alternative. Antisepsis before and after gel or subconjunctival anesthetic is suggested. The preponderance of Streptococcal infections after intravitreal injection is discussed, including the possible role of aerosolization, which can be minimized by using face masks or maintaining silence. As with other invasive procedures in medicine, the use of sterile gloves, following adequate hand antisepsis, may be considered. Control of the eyelashes and lid margin is required to avoid contamination of the needle, but this can be achieved with or without a speculum. Techniques to minimize vitreous reflux have not been shown to reduce the risk of endophthalmitis. Same day bilateral injections should be performed as two separate procedures, preferably using drug from different lots, especially when using compounded drugs.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Norway 1 1%
Unknown 68 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 14%
Other 9 13%
Student > Postgraduate 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 22 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 44%
Unspecified 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 28 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 July 2015.
All research outputs
#20,290,425
of 22,826,360 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Retina and Vitreous
#139
of 213 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,627
of 264,077 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Retina and Vitreous
#3
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,826,360 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 213 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,077 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.