RESUMEN
Purpose: The aim of this study was to present the signs, symptoms, management, and outcome of a series of cases of cluster endophthalmitis caused by a multi-drug resistant fungus, Trichosporon. Methods: This was a retrospective, non-randomized, consecutive interventional case series. Ten cases of postoperative endophthalmitis operated by a surgeon on three consecutive operation theater (OT) days presented 3�months after their surgery. All cases were microbiologically confirmed. The pathogen was found to be resistant to most antifungals, including amphotericin B. The cases had a latent period of around 45 days. Management of endophthalmitis included intravitreal injections, anterior chamber (AC) lavage, Pars Plana vitrectomy (PPV), posterior capsulotomy, IOL, and capsular bag removal. Multiple intravitreal injections were required due to recurrence of infections after initial improvement with voriconazole injections. Results: Structural integrity was maintained and infection-free status was achieved in all the eyes. The presenting vision ranged from 6/60 to PL (perception of light). Seven out of 10 had improvement in their final vision over the presenting vision. Final outcome of four patients had vision of 6/24 or better, 4 patients had vision in the range of 2/60 to 6/36 and 2 patients had PL. Conclusion: Trichosporon can cause devasting infections even in the immunocompetent, especially in association with implants and catheters. Triazoles form the mainstay of treatment of Trichosporon infection due to the high susceptibility of the organism in vitro. A regimen including voriconazole and amphotericin B may prove to be the most effective. This is the first report of an outbreak of cluster endophthalmitis caused by Trichosporon
RESUMEN
Purpose: To report clinical features, antibiotic susceptibility profile, management, and outcomes of a cluster outbreak of post?cataract surgery Pseudomonas stutzeri endophthalmitis. Methods: This was a hospital?based case series in which 14 patients with acute postoperative endophthalmitis who underwent cataract surgery on the same day were included. Based on severity of presentation, they either underwent pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) with intraocular antibiotics (IOAB) or vitreous tap with IOAB. Vitreous aspirates and environmental surveillance samples were inoculated on culture media and further processed by MALDI?TOF MS for identification and Vitek3 for susceptibility profile. Results: There were 8 females and 6 males with a mean age of 62.14 ± 8.08 years. Presenting signs included corneal folds (100%), hypopyon (57.1%) and fibrin (50%). Ten patients with mild presentation underwent vitreous tap with IOAB. Four patients with severe presentation underwent PPV with IOAB. Pseudomonas stutzeri was isolated from the vitreous samples and was pan?sensitive. Six eyes required multiple interventions. Favorable outcome was obtained in 12 eyes, one eye developed phthisis, and one patient was lost to follow?up. Conclusion: We report the first ever cluster outbreak of Pseudomonas stutzeri endophthalmitis following phacoemulsification with IOL implantation in a single surgeon setting. Majority of the patients had a mild presentation and responded well to targeted anti?microbial treatment.
RESUMEN
Purpose: To present varied clinical presentations, surveillance reports, and final visual outcomes of a rare outbreak of cluster endophthalmitis caused by gram?negative, opportunistic bacilli, Burkholderia cepacia complex (Bcc). Methods: Details of five patients who developed postoperative cluster endophthalmitis were collected. For each patient, an undiluted vitreous sample was collected during vitreous tap. Bacterial culture from the vitreous sample in each case had grown Bcc. Surveillance investigations for root cause analysis (RCA) were performed in the operating room (OR), admission, and day?care wards to localize the source. Results: Four patients had undergone phacoemulsification surgery, and one patient had undergone penetrating keratoplasty. Each patient received an initial dose of empiric intravitreal ceftazidime and vancomycin. The organism isolated in each case was sensitive to ceftazidime, cotrimoxazole, and meropenem and resistant to other antibiotics. Core vitrectomy was done after 48–60 hours in four patients along with intravitreal imipenem injection. One patient did not provide consent for core vitrectomy and subsequently developed phthisis bulbi. Three patients had subsequent recurrences. Two patients had a final BCVA of 20/60, two had BCVA better than 20/200, while one patient had no perception of light. None of the surveillance samples from the OR complex could isolate Burkholderia. Conclusion: Extensive OR surveillance should be done to identify the potential source of infection. However, the source may not be identifiable in few instances like in our case. Longer follow?up is recommended in cases of Bcc endophthalmitis due to the persistent nature of the infection
RESUMEN
Occurrence of postoperative cluster endophthalmitis is a nightmare for the operating surgeon, the involved hospital, and the patients. Due to its multifactorial etiology, surveillance of such an event is extremely important to identify the causative factor and to prevent recurrences in future. For surveillance, a team of ophthalmologists and microbiologists is often appointed by the local health department, and it is imperative that this team investigates thoroughly, reports appropriately safeguarding the interests of all, and also suggests remedial measures for future. Much literature is available on postoperative endophthalmitis and sterilization and disinfection protocols, but to the best of our knowledge, there is none to guide the surveillance team regarding the conduct of the entire process of investigation in the case of such unfortunate incidents. Through this article, we have made an attempt to formulate recommendations for expert teams investigating cases of postoperative cluster endophthalmitis.
RESUMEN
The risk of endophthalmitis is always a concern when an intraocular procedure is performed. Intravitreal injection is a frequently used method for therapeutic management of many diseases, affecting the posterior segment of the eye. Hence, it is important to assess the risk of complications, especially endophthalmitis. Most studies conducted concentrate on risk assessment from single use from single drug vial. The present article reports the occurrence of cluster endophthalmitis following multiple intravitreal bevacizumab injections from a single vial. Intravitreal injection of bevacizumab was administered to eight eyes of eight patients. Administered dose was prepared from single 4-ml vial of bevacizumab and was injected in the eye, after patient preparation and under aseptic conditions. The procedure was repeated for the remaining patients, thereby imparting multiple pricks in the same vial. Four of the eight patients reported to the hospital on the 3rd day after injection with complaints of pain, watering, and diminution of vision. Two patients reported the following day with similar complaints. Two patients who did not report by the 4th day were contacted and recalled for an examination. All the patients were thoroughly examined using slit lamp biomicroscopy and indirect ophthalmoscopy. Six out of eight were clinically diagnosed to have endophthalmitis and were administered intravitreal antibiotics. The present report highlights possibility of microbial contamination of the drug vial or during compounding process. However, from the present incident, we are encouraged to stay vigilant and wary of contamination.