Evidence Hub

Infectious Endophthalmitis: An Overview of Clinical Features, Microbiology Profile, and Antibiotic Sensitivity Pattern

Tabatabaei SA, Masoumi A, Mirzaei A, Mirshahi R, Momenaei B, Bijani FM, Rashidinia A, Nazari M et al.

Journal of current ophthalmology, 2024

657 participants

Abstract

PURPOSE: To describe the demographic characteristics, etiology, microbiological spectrum, and antibiotic sensitivity patterns in patients with endophthalmitis.

METHODS: This is a retrospective case series spanning from May 2012 to September 2018. All included patients were diagnosed with endophthalmitis and confirmed by laboratory tests. Data were collected on patient demographics, types of endophthalmitis, and microbiologic and medical records.

RESULTS: Nine hundred ninety-two records of patients with endophthalmitis were assessed. Of the total cases, 657 patients (66.2%) were male, whereas 335 (33.8%) were female. The mean age of the patients was 57.2 ± 22.8 years and ranged from 2 to 95 years. The type of endophthalmitis was acute postcataract surgery (44.4%), posttraumatic (26.7%), chronic postcataract surgery (6.6%), endogenous (6.4%), postintravitreal injection (5.0%), keratitis-associated (3.6%), postvitrectomy (2.7%), bleb-associated (2.4%), postkeratoplasty (1.9%), and device-related (0.1%). The most frequently isolated organisms were Staphylococcus epidermidis (11.7%), followed by Streptococcus pneumoniae (5.2%) and Streptococcus viridans (5.1%). Antibiotic susceptibility testing in patients with acute postcataract surgery endophthalmitis showed variable sensitivity of S. epidermidis isolates to vancomycin (81.4%), ciprofloxacin (76.2%), and levofloxacin (75.0%). In patients with posttraumatic endophthalmitis, high rates of zone 1 injury (61.5%), traumatic cataract…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 657 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free