ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: We aimed to compare the visual outcomes after pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) versus tap and inject (T&I) in fungal endophthalmitis (FE) reported in the literature and to compare the findings from the literature with data from a reference centre. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting the use of PPV versus T&I in FE. We also performed a retrospective review of the clinical records of patients with endophthalmitis from a reference centre in Colombia. RESULTS: We included 13 studies with 334 eyes; 53.59% received PPV and 46.4% received T&I. The overall relative risk of improving ≥ 2 lines in PPV versus T&I was 0.98 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80-1.22; p = 0.88) with a mean difference of final visual acuity of 0.26 (95% CI 0.12-0.63; p = 0.18). There were no significant differences in subgroup analysis. Data from the reference centre included 32 endophthalmitis cases, 15.6% of which had a fungal aetiology (80% received PPV and 20% T&I). There were no significant differences in the subgroup analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the findings from the literature and the reference centre, T&I is noninferior to PPV. This is the first meta-analysis in the literature evaluating these effects in FE. It is necessary to execute new prospective randomised controlled studies in patients with endophthalmitis.
