BackgroundThe purpose of this study is to evaluate the prevalence, antimicrobial susceptibilities, and visual acuity outcome of acute-onset postoperative Gram-negative bacterial endophthalmitis cases resistant to both ceftazidime and amikacin seen between 2005 and 2010 at L. V. Prasad Eye Institute, a tertiary care ophthalmic Centre in South India. Medical records of all patients with Gram-negative bacterial endophthalmitis resistant to both amikacin and ceftazidime between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2010 were reviewed in this non-comparative, consecutive, retrospective case series. Favorable outcome was defined as a best-corrected visual acuity of ≥20/200.ResultsSixty five (39.6%) of 164 culture-positive postoperative endophthalmitis were caused by Gram-negative organisms. Among these 65 isolates, 32 (49%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 37% to 61%) were resistant to ceftazidime, 17 (26%; 95% CI 15% to 37%) to amikacin, and 12 (18.5%; 95% CI 9% to 27%) to both ceftazidime and amikacin. Eight Pseudomonas isolates, three Enterobacter isolates, and one Haemophilus isolate were resistant to both ceftazidime and amikacin. The isolates were sensitive to fluoroquinolones (42%) and imipenem (50%). Presenting visual acuity was light perception in 10 (83.3%) cases. A final visual acuity ≥20/200 was achieved in 5/12 (41.7%) of these patients.ConclusionIn the current study, Pseudomonas was the most common Gram-negative bacteria resistant to both amikacin and ceftazidime. The emergence of multidrug-resistant bacteria causing endophthalmitis is a matter of concern in India. Alternative antibiotics like imipenem or fluoroquinolones may be considered for the management of these resistant organisms.
BackgroundThe purpose of this study is to evaluate the microbiological profile and treatment outcomes of vancomycin-resistant Gram-positive bacterial endophthalmitis. Medical records of all patients with Gram-positive bacterial endophthalmitis resistant to vancomycin presenting between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2010 were reviewed in this noncomparative, consecutive, retrospective case series. Favorable outcome was defined as a best-corrected visual acuity of ≥20/200.ResultsOut of 682 culture-positive endophthalmitis isolates, 448/682 (65.6%) were associated with Gram-positive bacteria. In vitro resistance to vancomycin was noted in 7/448 (1.56%). Three cases were posttraumatic, three were postoperative, and one was endogenous in origin. Four Bacillus isolates, two Staphylococcus isolates, and an Enterococcus isolate were resistant. Isolates resistant to vancomycin were sensitive in vitro to ciprofloxacin in 6/7 (86%) patients. Presenting visual acuity was light perception in all seven cases. Favorable outcome was achieved in only 1/7 (14.3%) cases.ConclusionsVancomycin-resistant endophthalmitis is uncommon and usually associated with poor visual outcome. Bacillus sp. is the most frequent Gram-positive bacteria resistant to vancomycin. Fluoroquinolones like ciprofloxacin may be considered as a useful alternative in vancomycin-resistant endophthalmitis.
Endophthalmitis following cataract surgery is rare but continues to be a serious complication following cataract surgery. Over the years, the incidence of endophthalmitis has declined because of various preoperative and perioperative measures. They include use of antiseptic and appropriate surgical draping techniques. In this review, we have focused on the incidence, existing risk factors, various clinical features, management strategies, and prophylaxis pertaining to postoperative endophthalmitis following cataract surgery. Outcomes and pitfalls of 2 landmark studies, namely, the Endophthalmitis Vitrectomy Study and the European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons Endophthalmitis Study, are briefly mentioned.Infectious endophthalmitis following cataract surgery is a dreaded complication. Preoperative identification of risk factors and effective prophylaxis could help in reducing its incidence. Early diagnosis followed by management of these patients either with vitreous tap or vitrectomy coupled with intravitreal antibiotics holds the key.
BackgroundThe purpose of the present study is to evaluate the prevalence, causative organisms, and visual acuity outcome in patients with culture-proven polymicrobial endophthalmitis. The method used in this study is the non-comparative, consecutive case series using a retrospective analysis of patients diagnosed with polymicrobial endophthalmitis for the period 2000 to 2010.ResultsPolymicrobial endophthalmitis was identified in 43/1,107 (3.88%) patients. Forty-two patients had two isolates, and one patient had grown three isolates, yielding a total of 87 isolates. Gram-positive cocci were the most common isolate (n = 53; 60.9%) including Staphylococcus epidermidis (n = 14/53; 16.1%) and Streptococcus pneumoniae (n = 13/53; 13.8%). The etiologies included posttraumatic (n = 31/43; 72.1%) and postoperative (n = 9/43; 20.9%) endophthalmitis. Antibiotic susceptibilities among Gram-positive bacteria were vancomycin (100%) and chloramphenicol (96%). Susceptibilities among Gram-negative bacteria were ciprofloxacin (86.4%) and ofloxacin (81.2%). A maximum number of secondary interventions were done in traumatic cases (38.7%) and cases having coinfection with Gram-negative bacteria and fungus (66.7%). Visual acuity (VA) < 20/200 was more frequently observed in posttraumatic cases (n = 27/31; 87.1%) as compared with postoperative cases (n = 4/9; 44.4%). Of the 43 patients, only 9 patients (20.9%) achieved a VA ≥ 20/200 on final follow-up. Four out of twelve patients (33.3%), with fungus as one of the isolates, had a VA ≥ 20/200.ConclusionsAlthough polymicrobial infection in endophthalmitis is uncommon, it is generally associated with poor visual acuity outcomes especially in eyes with open-globe injuries. Coinfection with Gram-negative bacteria or fungi was associated with most unfavorable visual outcome.
No abstract
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.