Bacteriological Profile of Ophthalmic Infections in an Israeli Hospital

Aim To find the optimal antibiotic treatment for ophthalmic infections in an Israeli hospital. Methods In a retrospective study from our laboratory, which serves as both a primary and secondary referral center, we analyzed the bacteriological profile and the antibiotic sensitivity of ophthalmic infections using the computerized laboratory reports of 331 consecutive ophthlamic bacteriological cultures from patients with various ophthalmic infections. Results Microbiological growth was obtained in 113 samples (34.1%). The most commonly isolated organism was coagulase-negative staphylococcus (19.5%), followed by coagulase-positive staphylococcus (16.8%), Enterobacteriaceae (14.2%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (13.3%), and streptococcal species (8.9%). Pseudomonas species were the most common isolates from the lacrimal pathways (20.0%). Streptococci were the most common isolates cultured from the conjunctiva (27.3%). Coagulase-positive staphylococcus was the most common isolate from corneal ulcers (33.3%), and coagulase-negative staphylococcus from the vitreous (30.8%). The overall antibiotic sensitivity of common ophthalmic pathogens was similar to that reported from other parts of the world. Conclusions Although essentially similar to previous series, this report from the Middle East differs as follows. Firstly, Pseudomonas species were the most common isolates from the lacrimal pathways. Secondly, the overall rate of streptococcal isolates was lower than in previous reports. Thirdly, streptococcal species were rarely isolated from corneal samples. Although other studies from the region have described the causative organisms of ocular infections in specific ocular sites, this is the first study from the Middle East to summarize the full bacteriological profile of ocular infections in one medical center.

[1]  S. Linn,et al.  Lack of effect of prophylactic gentamicin treatment on intraocular and extraocular fluid cultures after pars plana vitrectomy. , 1998, Ophthalmic surgery and lasers.

[2]  B. Holden,et al.  Microbial contamination of hydrogel contact lenses , 1997, Journal of applied microbiology.

[3]  O. Lehtonen,et al.  Bacteriology of lacrimal duct obstruction in adults , 1997, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[4]  S. Wisniewski,et al.  Spectrum and susceptibilities of microbiologic isolates in the Endophthalmitis Vitrectomy Study. , 1996, American journal of ophthalmology.

[5]  P. McDonnell,et al.  The role of smears, cultures, and antibiotic sensitivity testing in the management of suspected infectious keratitis. , 1996, Ophthalmology.

[6]  J. Dart,et al.  Strategies for the management of microbial keratitis. , 1995, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[7]  L. Schlegel,et al.  [Retrospective study of the prevalence and sensitivity to antibiotics of bacteria isolated from ocular samplings]. , 1995, Journal francais d'ophtalmologie.

[8]  J. Whitcher,et al.  Epidemiologic characteristics, predisposing factors, and etiologic diagnosis of corneal ulceration in Nepal. , 1991, American journal of ophthalmology.

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

[10]  E. Alfonso,et al.  Ulcerative keratitis associated with contact lens wear. , 1989, American journal of ophthalmology.

[11]  W. Culbertson,et al.  Pseudophakic endophthalmitis. Diagnosis and management. , 1986, Ophthalmology.

[12]  K. Kenyon,et al.  Corneal Disorders: Clinical Diagnosis and Management , 1984 .

[13]  R. Perkins,et al.  Bacteriology of normal and infected conjunctiva , 1975, Journal of clinical microbiology.