4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Retrobulbar Injection of Amphotericin B in Patients With COVID-19 Associated Orbital Mucormycosis: A Systematic Review

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Purpose:

          Following COVID-19 infection a rising count of rhino-orbito-cerebral mucormycosis is observed, requiring orbital exenteration, a disabling lifetime affecting surgery. One of the potential interventions for globe salvage in these patients is retrobulbar injections of amphotericin B. This study was conducted to review protocols, outcomes, and side effects of retrobulbar injection of amphotericin B in patients with COVID-19 associated rhino-orbito-cerebral mucormycosis (CAM).

          Methods:

          The PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase databases were searched using a comprehensive string of relevant keywords. All English studies with the confirmed diagnosis of CAM infection were included. We excluded all studies in which retrobulbar injection of amphotericin B was not implemented in any of the patients or there was a lack of clarified and detailed data about this procedure among participants.

          Results:

          A total of 647 cases had a history of retrobulbar injection(s) of amphotericin B in 13 reviewed studies with 3,132 subjects of CAM. The most common protocol was the retrobulbar injection of 1 ml of 3.5 mg/ml liposomal amphotericin B for 3 doses daily or on alternate days. We discerned that the globe salvage rate was 95.0% in eyes with a history of retrobulbar injection(s). The total rate of orbital exenteration was 14.9%, regardless of the history of retrobulbar injection of the drug. Other outcomes of this intervention were vision salvage and reduced major ophthalmic complaints, including pain, swelling, chemosis, ptosis, and ophthalmoplegia. The side effects of this intervention were not serious, and most of them were transient. They included swelling at the injection site, restriction of ocular motilities, exacerbation of orbital inflammation, and even intensification of visual impairment in a few cases.

          Conclusions:

          Retrobulbar injection of amphotericin B should be considered a nearly safe and protective intervention against orbital exenteration in patients with CAM. It may also be effective in saving vision. Since the effectiveness of orbital exenteration in the survival of patients is not ascertained, retrobulbar injections can be considered an alternative intervention.

          Abstract

          Retrobulbar injection of amphotericin B is a nearly safe procedure which can lead to eye globe salvage and reducing the rate of orbital exenteration in patients with COVID-19 associated orbital mucormycosis.

          Related collections

          Most cited references54

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

          The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews

            Background Synthesis of multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in a systematic review can summarize the effects of individual outcomes and provide numerical answers about the effectiveness of interventions. Filtering of searches is time consuming, and no single method fulfills the principal requirements of speed with accuracy. Automation of systematic reviews is driven by a necessity to expedite the availability of current best evidence for policy and clinical decision-making. We developed Rayyan (http://rayyan.qcri.org), a free web and mobile app, that helps expedite the initial screening of abstracts and titles using a process of semi-automation while incorporating a high level of usability. For the beta testing phase, we used two published Cochrane reviews in which included studies had been selected manually. Their searches, with 1030 records and 273 records, were uploaded to Rayyan. Different features of Rayyan were tested using these two reviews. We also conducted a survey of Rayyan’s users and collected feedback through a built-in feature. Results Pilot testing of Rayyan focused on usability, accuracy against manual methods, and the added value of the prediction feature. The “taster” review (273 records) allowed a quick overview of Rayyan for early comments on usability. The second review (1030 records) required several iterations to identify the previously identified 11 trials. The “suggestions” and “hints,” based on the “prediction model,” appeared as testing progressed beyond five included studies. Post rollout user experiences and a reflexive response by the developers enabled real-time modifications and improvements. The survey respondents reported 40% average time savings when using Rayyan compared to others tools, with 34% of the respondents reporting more than 50% time savings. In addition, around 75% of the respondents mentioned that screening and labeling studies as well as collaborating on reviews to be the two most important features of Rayyan. As of November 2016, Rayyan users exceed 2000 from over 60 countries conducting hundreds of reviews totaling more than 1.6M citations. Feedback from users, obtained mostly through the app web site and a recent survey, has highlighted the ease in exploration of searches, the time saved, and simplicity in sharing and comparing include-exclude decisions. The strongest features of the app, identified and reported in user feedback, were its ability to help in screening and collaboration as well as the time savings it affords to users. Conclusions Rayyan is responsive and intuitive in use with significant potential to lighten the load of reviewers.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Mucormycosis in COVID-19: A systematic review of cases reported worldwide and in India

              Background and aims There are increasing case reports of rhino-orbital mucormycosis in people with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), especially in India. Diabetes mellitus (DM) is an independent risk factor for both severe COVID-19 and mucormycosis. We aim to conduct a systematic review of literature to find out the patient's characteristics having mucormycosis and COVID-19. Methods We searched the electronic database of PubMed and Google Scholar from inception until May 13, 2021 using keywords. We retrieved all the granular details of case reports/series of patients with mucormycosis, and COVID-19 reported world-wide. Subsequently we analyzed the patient characteristics, associated comorbidities, location of mucormycosis, use of steroids and its outcome in people with COVID-19. Results Overall, 101 cases of mucormycosis in people with COVID-19 have been reported, of which 82 cases were from India and 19 from the rest of the world. Mucormycosis was predominantly seen in males (78.9%), both in people who were active (59.4%) or recovered (40.6%) from COVID-19. Pre-existing diabetes mellitus (DM) was present in 80% of cases, while concomitant diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) was present in 14.9%. Corticosteroid intake for the treatment of COVID-19 was recorded in 76.3% of cases. Mucormycosis involving nose and sinuses (88.9%) was most common followed by rhino-orbital (56.7%). Mortality was noted in 30.7% of the cases. Conclusion An unholy trinity of diabetes, rampant use of corticosteroid in a background of COVID-19 appears to increase mucormycosis. All efforts should be made to maintain optimal glucose and only judicious use of corticosteroids in patients with COVID-19.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg
                Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg
                IOP
                Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
                Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (Hagerstown, MD )
                0740-9303
                1537-2677
                08 August 2022
                Sep-Oct 2022
                08 August 2022
                : 38
                : 5
                : 425-432
                Affiliations
                [* ]Department of Ophthalmology, Shafa Hospital, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran
                []Faculty of Medicine, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran
                []HIV/STI Surveillance Research Center, and WHO Collaborating Center for HIV Surveillance, Institute for Futures Studies in Health, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran.
                Author notes
                Address correspondence and reprint requests to Amin Zand, M.D., Department of Ophthalmology, Shafa Hospital, Shafa St. 7616913555, Kerman, Iran. E-mail: sandpost3@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                00002
                10.1097/IOP.0000000000002256
                9451608
                35943425
                a874c6a8-2465-4617-aa9a-1ca9c139d23b
                © 2022 The American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Inc.

                This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic or until permissions are revoked in writing. Upon expiration of these permissions, PMC is granted a perpetual license to make this article available via PMC and Europe PMC, consistent with existing copyright protections.

                History
                : 16 June 2022
                Categories
                Major Reviews
                Custom metadata
                T

                Comments

                Comment on this article