Reply

Abstract

We thank Dr Grzybowski for his interest in our article. 1 Dossarps D. Bron A.M. Koehrer P. Aho-Glele L.S. Creuzot-Garcher C. for the FRCR NET (FRENCH RETINA SPECIALISTS NET)Endophthalmitis after intravitreal injections: incidence, presentation, management, and visual outcome. Am J Ophthalmol. 2015; 160: 17-25 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (101) Google Scholar In his letter he points out some discrepancies between the text of our article and the content of Table 1. We think the confusion comes from the interpretation of the title of Table 1. We mentioned in the title of Table 1 “Factors influencing the incidence of endophthalmitis after intravitreal injections.” “Influencing” is a neutral wording and should not be interpreted as increasing or decreasing. Therefore, taking into account the sense of “influencing,” we do not think that “Table 1 delivers opposite data,” as stated by our colleague. The last point of the letter refers to a paper we published previously on a small series of 11 450 intravitreal injections performed in a single center. 2 Ramel J.C. Bron A.M. Isaico R. et al. [Incidence of endophthalmitis after intravitreal injection: is antibioprophylaxis mandatory?]. J Fr Ophthalmol. 2014; 37: 273-279 Crossref PubMed Scopus (9) Google Scholar In the conclusion of this paper we warned the reader that since the series was small it was not possible to draw definitive conclusions regarding the use of antibioprophylaxis for intravitreal injections of anti-VEGF agents or corticosteroids. Therefore our last sentence addressed the wish for a larger multicenter study and that was done for the Journal paper. Our study was inspired by the efforts of the diabetic retinopathy clinical research network. 3 Bhavsar A.R. Googe Jr., J.M. Stockdale C.R. et al. Risk of endophthalmitis after intravitreal drug injection when topical antibiotics are not required: the diabetic retinopathy clinical research network laser-ranibizumab-triamcinolone clinical trials. Arch Ophthalmol. 2009; 127: 1581-1583 Crossref PubMed Scopus (141) Google Scholar Although we may find some weaknesses in collecting data from various centers of 1 country, at least we must acknowledge that having 25 different centers (university hospitals and private centers) allowed us to collect a total of 316 576 intravitreal injections. The findings of such a series give a good view of what is done in the “real world” and moreover are much more robust than the results of 1 center, especially for diseases with low prevalence, such as endophthalmitis after intravitreal injections. Endophthalmitis After Intravitreal Injections: Incidence, Presentation, Management, and Visual OutcomeAmerican Journal of OphthalmologyVol. 160Issue 4PreviewI read with interest the article by Dossarps and associates,1 in which they reported the results of their multicenter (25 centers) retrospective study, including incidence and characteristics of endophthalmitis after 316 576 intravitreal injections (IVI). Antibiotic prophylaxis was based on topical 1.5% azithromycin for 3 days either before or after IVI; antiseptic prophylaxis, topical 0.05% picloxydine 3 days before and 3 days after IVI. They reported that in univariate analysis, use of an antibiotic or antiseptic was statistically associated with an increased incidence of endophthalmitis (P = .011 and P = .021, respectively). Full-Text PDF