Etiology, microbiological isolates, and antibiotic susceptibilities in culture-proven pediatric endophthalmitis: a 9-year review

18Citations
Citations of this article
16Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Purpose: To analyze the etiology, microbiological isolates, and antibiotic susceptibilities of endophthalmitis in pediatric patients. Methods: Patients aged < 18 years with culture-positive endophthalmitis in Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center between January 2010 and December 2018 were included retrospectively. Results: A total of 127 patients (127 eyes) were included, and 108 (85%) had posttraumatic endophthalmitis. Streptococcus (21.4%), coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (14.5%), Aspergillus (6.9%), and Bacillus cereus (5.3%) were the common organisms. The proportion of Streptococcus decreased with age (40.0% in 0–3 years, 16.3% in 4–12 years, and 6.3% in 13–17 years), while coagulase-negative Staphylococcus increased from 5.7% to 18.8%. Overall, fluoroquinolones achieved the highest antibiotic susceptibility rate (> 95%), while the susceptibility of isolated bacteria to tobramycin and cefazolin was only 60.2% and 59.4%, respectively. The susceptibility rates of Gram-positive cocci to cephalosporins were nearly 90%. For Gram-negative bacilli, susceptibility to neomycin was 91.3%. Conclusion: Trauma was the main etiology for pediatric endophthalmitis. Although Streptococcus was the most prevalent organism in general, the dominant pathogen varied with age, which merits clinical attention. Fluoroquinolones showed the highest antibiotic efficacy; however, commonly used antibiotics tobramycin and cefazolin showed relatively low antibiotic susceptibility. Thus, antibiotic resistance in pediatric populations merits clinical attention.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Yang, Y., Lin, L., Li, Y., Jiang, Z., Li, C., Liu, M., … Lin, X. (2021). Etiology, microbiological isolates, and antibiotic susceptibilities in culture-proven pediatric endophthalmitis: a 9-year review. Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 259(1), 197–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-020-04866-7

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