The review document published recently in Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology's virtual journal falls short of meeting its own stated goal of providing an evidence-based review including updates from significant trials relating to intravitreal therapy. The rates of endophthalmitis are not appropriately referenced with the statement made; 'Rates of endophthalmitis in large multicentre trials . . . 0.019%'. This reference is not a large multicentre randomized trial (level II) rather a retrospective series (level IV).3 The VEGF Inhibition Study in Ocular Neovascularisation study is omitted in providing a range, which shows a rate of 0.18%.4 Also, unmentioned is Moshfeghi et al.'s paper that shows an incidence of 0.87% in the largest published series of intravitreal triamcinolone acetonide injections.5 It is relevant to note that these reflect the range of endophthalmitis rates for one injection.
展开▼
