Evidence Hub

Clinical and microbiological profile of infectious keratitis in an area of Madrid, Spain

Mediero S, Boto de Los Bueis A, Spiess K, Díaz-Almirón M, Del Hierro Zarzuelo A, Villalaín Rodes I, García Perea A

Enfermedades infecciosas y microbiologia clinica (English ed.), 2018

215 participants

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: To study antibiotic susceptibility in bacterial keratitis (BK), its profile over 10 years and its influence on ophthalmological practice.

METHODS: Retrospective review of BK with positive corneal scraping over a 10-year period. Risk factors for keratitis, visual acuity (VA), empirical topical treatment, corneal infection characteristics and outcomes were analyzed for BK due to Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Propionibacterium acnes.

RESULTS: 389 positive corneal scrapings were collected. All Gram-positive bacteria were susceptible to vancomycin. P. aeruginosa demonstrated >90% sensitivity to the most-commonly-used topical antibiotics. Susceptibility to methicillin was 90.2% for S. aureus and 66.3% for S. epidermidis. The results of 215 patients were available. 1.9% required enucleation and 2.8% required surgical treatments. Final VA improved after treatment in keratitis due to S. aureus (p=0.026) and S. epidermidis (p=0.005). There was a correlation between S. aureus resistance to methicillin (p=0.002) and levofloxacin (p=0.043) and enucleation (20% and 10%, respectively) compared with a 0% rate of enucleation in S. aureus-susceptible keratitis.

CONCLUSIONS: BK due to S. pneumoniae is very aggressive irrespective of antibiotic sensitivity. S. aureus was frequently isolated in patients with systemic diseases. It causes severe keratitis and remains moderately resistant to methicillin and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 215 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free