Microbial characteristics of post-traumatic infective keratitis

8Citations
Citations of this article
44Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Purpose: To determine the demographics, risk factors, clinical and microbiological characteristics, and treatment outcome of post-traumatic infective keratitis. Methods: Consecutive patients with post-traumatic infective keratitis presenting to the Ophthalmology Department of a tertiary referral hospital in Singapore between March 2012 and March 2016 were prospectively identified. A standardized data collection form was used to document patient demographics, microbiological diagnosis, antibiotic sensitivity, and pretreatment and posttreatment ocular characteristics. Any contact lens-induced keratitis was excluded from the study. Results: In total, 26 patients were included for analysis. The mean age was 40.0 years (SD ± 19.4) and 84.6% of the patients were male. The majority of the patients (69.2%, n = 18) had sustained work-related injury in their eyes. Gram-negative organisms were predominant isolates (75.0%, n = 12) in culture-positive corneal scrapings (n = 16). Pan-sensitive Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the commonest organism isolated among the culture-positive cases (56.2%, n = 9). Three patients (18.7%) had developed fungal keratitis and Acanthamoeba was isolated in 1 patient (6.2%) with polymicrobial keratitis. Infections resolved with medical treatment in 22 eyes (84.6%) and 4 eyes (15.3%) required therapeutic corneal transplantation. Conclusions: A shift of practice in post-traumatic infective keratitis should be considered in tropical countries to include Gram-negative cover. Work safety practices with vigilance in initiating treatment and education by front-line physicians such as ophthalmology and general practitioners should be reinforced.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Lim, B. X., Koh, V. T. C., & Ray, M. (2018). Microbial characteristics of post-traumatic infective keratitis. European Journal of Ophthalmology, 28(1), 13–18. https://doi.org/10.5301/ejo.5001009

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free