In Vitro Activity of Chlorhexidine Compared with Seven Antifungal Agents against 98 Fusarium Isolates Recovered from Fungal Keratitis Patients

Fungal keratitis is a common but severe eye infection in tropical and subtropical areas of the world. In regions with a temperate climate, the frequency of infection is rising in patients with contact lenses and following trauma. Early and adequate therapy is important to prevent disease progression and loss of vision. The management of Fusarium keratitis is complex, and the optimal treatment is not well defined. ABSTRACT Fungal keratitis is a common but severe eye infection in tropical and subtropical areas of the world. In regions with a temperate climate, the frequency of infection is rising in patients with contact lenses and following trauma. Early and adequate therapy is important to prevent disease progression and loss of vision. The management of Fusarium keratitis is complex, and the optimal treatment is not well defined. We investigated the in vitro activity of chlorhexidine and seven antifungal agents against a well-characterized collection of Fusarium isolates recovered from patients with Fusarium keratitis. The fungus culture collection of the Center of Expertise in Mycology Radboudumc/CWZ was searched for Fusarium isolates that were cultured from cornea scrapings, ocular biopsy specimens, eye swabs, and contact lens fluid containers from patients with suspected keratitis. The Fusarium isolates that were cultured from patients with confirmed keratitis were all identified using conventional and molecular techniques. Antifungal susceptibility testing was performed according to the EUCAST broth microdilution reference method. The antifungal agents tested included amphotericin B, voriconazole, posaconazole, miconazole, natamycin, 5-fluorocytosine, and caspofungin. In addition, the activity of chlorhexidine was determined. The fungal culture collection contained 98 Fusarium isolates of confirmed fungal keratitis cases from 83 Dutch patients and 15 Tanzanian patients. The isolates were collected between 2007 and 2017. Fusarium oxysporum (n = 24, 24.5%) was the most frequently isolated species followed by Fusarium solani sensu stricto (n = 18, 18.4%) and Fusarium petroliphilum (n = 11, 11.2%). Amphotericin B showed the most favorable in vitro inhibition of Fusarium species followed by natamycin, voriconazole, and chlorhexidine, while 5-fluorocytosine, posaconazole, miconazole, and caspofungin showed no relevant inhibiting effect. However, chlorhexidine showed fungicidal activity against 90% of F. oxysporum strains and 100% of the F. solani strains. Our study supports the clinical efficacy of chlorhexidine and therefore warrants its further clinical evaluation for primary therapy of fungal keratitis, particularly in low and middle income countries where fungal keratitis is much more frequent and, currently, antifungal eye drops are often unavailable.

[1]  M. Ghannoum,et al.  International Evaluation of MIC Distributions and Epidemiological Cutoff Value (ECV) Definitions for Fusarium Species Identified by Molecular Methods for the CLSI Broth Microdilution Method , 2015, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[2]  T. Boekhout,et al.  Phylogenetic diversity of human pathogenic Fusarium and emergence of uncommon virulent species. , 2015, The Journal of infection.

[3]  Jing Lin,et al.  Natamycin in the treatment of fungal keratitis: a systematic review and Meta-analysis. , 2015, International journal of ophthalmology.

[4]  C. Kaufmann,et al.  Corneal Penetration of Polyhexamethylene Biguanide and Chlorhexidine Digluconate , 2015 .

[5]  B. Sampaio-Maia,et al.  Unpredictable susceptibility of emerging clinical moulds to tri-azoles: review of the literature and upcoming challenges for mould identification , 2015, European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases.

[6]  Jennifer R. Evans,et al.  Medical interventions for fungal keratitis. , 2015, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[7]  J. Meis,et al.  Specific antifungal susceptibility profiles of opportunists in the Fusarium fujikuroi complex. , 2014, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[8]  T. Lietman,et al.  Association between in vitro susceptibility to natamycin and voriconazole and clinical outcomes in fungal keratitis. , 2014, Ophthalmology.

[9]  Springer-Verlag,et al.  Fusariosis, a complex infection caused by a high diversity of fungal species refractory to treatment , 2013, European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases.

[10]  M. Srinivasan,et al.  The mycotic ulcer treatment trial: a randomized trial comparing natamycin vs voriconazole. , 2013, JAMA ophthalmology.

[11]  P. Thomas,et al.  Mycotic keratitis: epidemiology, diagnosis and management. , 2013, Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases.

[12]  I. Kaur,et al.  Topical delivery of antifungal agents , 2010, Expert opinion on drug delivery.

[13]  M. Srinivasan,et al.  Comparison of natamycin and voriconazole for the treatment of fungal keratitis. , 2010, Archives of ophthalmology.

[14]  Subcommittee on Antifungal Susceptibility Testing EUCAST Technical Note on the method for the determination of broth dilution minimum inhibitory concentrations of antifungal agents for conidia-forming moulds. , 2008, Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases.

[15]  G. Keshava,et al.  Mycotic keratitis: an overview of diagnosis and therapy , 2008, Mycoses.

[16]  C. Gianni,et al.  Species Distribution and In Vitro Antifungal Susceptibility Patterns of 75 Clinical Isolates of Fusarium spp. from Northern Italy , 2008, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[17]  E. Mellado,et al.  Antifungal susceptibility profile of clinical Fusarium spp. isolates identified by molecular methods. , 2008, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[18]  D. Denning,et al.  EUCAST DEFINITIVE DOCUMENT E.DEF 9.1: Method for the determination of broth dilution minimum inhibitory concentrations of antifungal agents for conidia forming moulds , 2008 .

[19]  S. Tuli,et al.  Fungal Keratitis: Emerging Trends and Treatment Outcomes , 2006, Eye & contact lens.

[20]  J. Graybill,et al.  Key issues concerning fungistatic versus fungicidal drugs , 2005, European Journal of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases.

[21]  M. Srinivasan,et al.  A randomised clinical trial comparing 2% econazole and 5% natamycin for the treatment of fungal keratitis , 2003, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[22]  A. D. Russell,et al.  Antiseptics and Disinfectants: Activity, Action, and Resistance , 1999, Clinical Microbiology Reviews.

[23]  G. Johnson,et al.  Randomised trial of 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 2.5% natamycin for fungal keratitis in Bangladesh , 1998, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[24]  G. Johnson,et al.  Trial of chlorhexidine gluconate for fungal corneal ulcers. , 1997, Ophthalmic epidemiology.

[25]  D. Jones,et al.  Fusarium solani keratitis treated with natamycin (pimaricin): eighteen consecutive cases. , 1972, Archives of ophthalmology.