Clinical Manifestation and Predisposing Factors of Infectious Keratitis Following Penetrating Keratoplasty in Korean Patients

Purpose: To report the clinical manifestation, predisposing factors, microbiological profiles and treatment outcome of infectious keratitis following penetrating keratoplasty (PK). Methods: Medical records of the post-PK patients later diagnosed with culture-positive keratitis, between January 2003 and June 2008 at our hospital were retrospectively reviewed. Results: Among 228 eyes of 226 patients who previously had PK, 18 eyes (7.89%) of 16 patients developed microbial keratitis. Fifteen patients had a bacterial infection, of which a Streprococcus species was the most common causative microorganism (6 eyes, 33.3%). Three eyes had fungal infection; one case was co-infected with bacteria. Six eyes (33.3%) presented with a suture-related problem, and sixteen eyes (88.9%) had been using topical glaucoma medications. The suture-related problem and use of glaucoma medication were significantly associated with the development of infectious keratitis (p=0.040 and 0.013, respectively). Remission was achieved in all cases within the mean duration of 2.47 months after treatment initiation. However, visual improvement was not achieved in 11 eyes (68.7%) due to graft opacity. Conclusions: Early identification of predisposing factors and appropriate management at an early stage may prevent the occurrence of graft infection and improve graft survival.

[1]  Savitri Sharma,et al.  Review of epidemiological features, microbiological diagnosis and treatment outcome of microbial keratitis: Experience of over a decade , 2009, Indian journal of ophthalmology.

[2]  A. Brahma,et al.  Penetrating keratoplasty: indications, outcomes, and complications , 2009, Eye.

[3]  Sujata Das,et al.  Microbial keratitis following corneal transplantation , 2007, Clinical & experimental ophthalmology.

[4]  M. Zimmerman,et al.  Bacterial keratitis after penetrating keratoplasty: incidence, microbiological profile, graft survival, and visual outcome. , 2007, Ophthalmology.

[5]  S. Stinnett,et al.  Analysis of bacterial cultures in infectious keratitis, 1997 to 2004. , 2006, American journal of ophthalmology.

[6]  M. Srinivasan,et al.  Microbiological diagnosis of infective keratitis: comparative evaluation of direct microscopy and culture results , 2006, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[7]  K. Jin,et al.  Epidemiologic Studies of Keratoplasty in Korea , 2006 .

[8]  M. Kim,et al.  Clinical Outcomes 10 Years after Penetrating Keratoplasty , 2006 .

[9]  G. Satpathy,et al.  Risk factors for graft infection in India: a case-control study , 2002, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[10]  L. Laroche,et al.  Kératites infectieuses après kératoplastie transfixiante , 2001 .

[11]  Y. Akova,et al.  Microbial keratitis following penetrating keratoplasty. , 1999, Ophthalmic surgery and lasers.

[12]  C. Siganos,et al.  Microbial findings in suture erosion after penetrating keratoplasty. , 1997, Ophthalmology.

[13]  A. Steele,et al.  Microbial keratitis after penetrating keratoplasty , 1990, Eye.

[14]  K. Tabbara,et al.  Bacterial keratitis after penetrating keratoplasty. , 1988, Ophthalmology.

[15]  R. D. Stulting,et al.  Late bacterial and fungal keratitis after corneal transplantation. Spectrum of pathogens, graft survival, and visual prognosis. , 1988, Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.).

[16]  C. Foster,et al.  Microbial keratitis complicating penetrating keratoplasty. , 1988, Ophthalmology.