ABSTRACT
AIMS: The aim of the study was to conduct a preliminary clinical trial to assess whether adjunctive topical corticosteroids improve outcomes in bacterial keratitis and, if no difference was found, to determine the feasibility and sample size necessary for conducting a larger trial to answer this question. METHODS: In this single centre, double-masked clinical trial, 42 patients with culture-confirmed bacterial keratitis at Aravind Eye Hospital in India were randomised to receive either topical prednisolone phosphate or placebo. All patients received topical moxifloxacin. The primary outcome was best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) at 3 months, adjusting for enrolment BSCVA and arm. Other pre-specified outcomes included re-epithelialisation time, infiltrate/scar size and adverse events. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, patients in the steroid group re-epithelialised more slowly (hazard ratio 0.47, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.94). There was no significant difference in BSCVA or infiltrate/scar size at 3 weeks or 3 months. To have 80% power to detect a two-line difference in acuity, 360 cases would be required. CONCLUSIONS: Although corticosteroid treatment resulted in a statistically significant delay in re-epithelialisation, this did not translate to a significant difference in visual acuity, infiltrate/scar size or adverse events. To assess the effect of steroids on acuity, a larger trial is warranted and feasible.
Subject(s)
Corneal Ulcer/drug therapy , Eye Infections, Bacterial/drug therapy , Glucocorticoids/therapeutic use , Prednisolone/analogs & derivatives , Adult , Aged , Corneal Ulcer/microbiology , Corneal Ulcer/physiopathology , Double-Blind Method , Epithelium, Corneal/physiology , Eye Infections, Bacterial/physiopathology , Feasibility Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Ophthalmic Solutions , Prednisolone/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome , Visual Acuity/drug effects , Wound Healing/drug effectsABSTRACT
AIM: To compare the prevalence of antibiotic resistance found in nasopharyngeal Streptococcus pneumoniae between villages treated with topical tetracycline or systemic azithromycin as part of a trachoma control programme. METHODS: All children aged 1-10 years were offered either single dose oral azithromycin treatment (20 mg/kg) or a course of topical 1% tetracycline ointment, depending on the area. Treatment was given annually for 3 years. Six months after the third annual treatment in each village, children were surveyed for nasopharyngeal carriage of S pneumoniae and resistance was determined using broth dilution MIC technique. Children in two additional villages, which had not yet been treated, were also surveyed. RESULTS: Nasopharyngeal carriage of S pneumoniae was similar in the tetracycline treated, azithromycin treated, and untreated areas (p=0.57). However, resistance to tetracycline and azithromycin was distributed differently between the three areas (p=0.004). The village treated with topical tetracycline had a higher prevalence of tetracycline resistance than the other villages (p=0.010), while the oral azithromycin treated village had a higher prevalence of macrolide resistance than the other villages (p=0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Annual mass treatment with oral azithromycin may alter the prevalence of drug resistant S pneumoniae in a community. Surprisingly, topical tetracycline may also increase nasopharyngeal pneumococcal resistance. Topical antibiotics may have an effect on extraocular bacterial resistance.