Clinical Features, Risk Factors, and Treatments of Microsporidial Epithelial Keratitis.

OBJECTIVE: To report the clinical manifestations, risk factors, and treatments of microsporidial epithelial keratitis in Thailand. METHODS: Twenty eyes of 19 patients were diagnosed and the clinical presentations, risk factors, and management were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 19 patients, six patients (32%) had no apparent risk factors. Predisposing factors included soil exposure (6/19, 32%), water contamination (6/19, 32%), and eye liner (1/19, 4%). Twelve cases (63%) were detected in the rainy season. All cases presented with disseminated, punctated, elevated, epithelial keratitis. Corneal scrapings with Gram-chromotrope staining were positive in all patients. Moxifloxacin 0.5% eye drops were given and all 16 patients experienced complete resolution. Three recurrent cases were resolved with only topical moxifloxacin without corneal scraping or swabbing. CONCLUSIONS: Predisposing factors were not found in some patients; thus, corneal scraping with staining should be considered in cases having a high index of suspicion. The incidence is increased during the rainy season; therefore, clinicians should have more awareness during these times. Debridement with topical moxifloxacin eye drops, without any systemic medication, may be an effective treatment. Corneal scraping or swabbing may not be required in recurrences.

A randomized controlled trial comparing dexamethasone with loteprednol etabonate on postoperative photorefractive keratectomy.

PURPOSE: To compare loteprednol etabonate 0.5%/tobramycin 0.3% (Zylet(®)) with dexamethasone 0.1%/tobramycin 0.3% (Tobradex(®)) in terms of the epithelial healing time, postoperative visual acuity, corneal haziness score, and intraocular pressure (IOP) in postoperative treatment after photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). METHODS: This prospective, randomized, double-masked (participants and assessors blinded) controlled study included 32 patients who underwent PRK. The patients were allocated equally into 2 groups by block randomization to receive either loteprednol etabonate (Lot) or dexamethasone (Dex) for 1 month after the surgery. The epithelial healing time, uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), corneal haziness score, and IOP were evaluated at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months. RESULTS: The corneal epithelium was healed within 3 days in both groups; however, the epithelium was closed on the second day in 3 cases in the Lot group compared with 1 case in the Dex group. No significant differences were found for UCVA at 1 and 3 months (Fisher exact test, P>0.01). Similarly, there was no statistically significant difference in corneal haziness scores between the 2 groups at 1 and 3 months (Mann-Whitney U test, P>0.05). The number of patients experiencing significantly increased IOP (≥5 mmHg) from baseline at any visit for the Lot group (1/16 patients) was fewer than for the Dex group (3/16 patients). CONCLUSIONS: Loteprednol etabonate was effective in postoperative PRK management and was significantly less likely to produce elevations in IOP than was dexamethasone.