[Efficacy of topical 0.3% ciprofloxacin application in reducing the conjunctival biota of patients undergoing cataract extraction]

Analysis of antibiotic resistance and genetic profile of conjunctival bacteria flora before and after cataract surgery

PURPOSE

To analyze antibiotic resistance and genetic profile of conjunctival bacteria flora before and after cataract surgery with the focus on coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) during cataract surgery and discuss the implications of this colonization as a potential risk of acquiring endophthalmitis.

METHODS

After approval of the institutional review board and informed consent from patients had been obtained, conjunctival swabs for culture from 59 patients undergoing cataract surgery were taken of the fellow eye at baseline (C0) and from the eye to be operated before (T0) and after (T1) irrigation with povine-iodine 5%, and at the end of surgery (T2). Genes responsible for virulence (mecA, ica and atlE) and antibiotic profile were determined; strain clonality of persistent colonizing Staphylococcus epidermidis strains was established by the Multi-locus sequence typing (MLST).

RESULTS

The frequency of CNS was significantly reduced in T1 (13.6%) from 81.4% in T0 and 86.4% in C0. The frequency of mecA, ica and atlE genes was 34.4%, 37.5% and 61.4%, respectively; and methicillin phenotypic resistance was 35.4%. S. epidermidis was the most frequent species isolated in every time point. MLST revealed in 7 patients 100% coincidence of the seven alleles of the S. epidermidis isolated previous to povine-iodine 5% disinfection and at the end of the surgery. CNS isolates from T1 or T2 corresponded to the same species, antibiotic and virulence profile as those isolates from C0 or T0.

CONCLUSION

Povidone-iodine 5% prophylaxis before surgery significantly reduced conjunctival contamination; in those that persisted, the source of contamination was mostly the patient's microbiota confirmed by the MLST system.

Conjunctival sac bacterial culture of patients using levofloxacin eye drops before cataract surgery: a real-world, retrospective study

Background

The use of antibiotics preoperatively is effective to decrease the incidence of ocular bacterial infections but may lead to high resistance rate, especially on patients with multi-risk clinical factors. This study systematically analyzed real-world data (RWD) of patients to reveal the association between clinical factors and conjunctival sac bacterial load and offer prophylaxis suggestions.

Methods

We retrieved RWD of patients using levofloxacin eye drops (5 mL: 24.4 mg, 4 times a day for 3 days) preoperatively. Retrieved data included information on the conjunctival sac bacterial culture, sex, presence of hypertension and diabetes mellitus (DM), and history of hospital-based surgeries. Data was analyzed using SPSS 24.0.

Results

RWD of 15,415 cases (patients) were retrieved. Among these patients, 5,866 (38.1%) were males and 9,549 (61.9%) females. 5,960 (38.7%) patients had a history of hypertension, and 3,493 (22.7%) patients had a history of DM. 7,555 (49.0%) patients had a history of hospital-based operations. There were 274 (1.8%) positive bacterial cultures. Male patients with hypertension and DM may be at increased risk of having positive bacterial cultures (P < 0.05). Staphylococcus epidermidis (n = 56, 20.4%), Kocuria rosea (n = 37, 13.5%), and Micrococcus luteus (n = 32, 11.7%) were the top 3 isolated strains. Most bacterial strains were resistant to various antibiotics except rifampin, and 82.5% (33 of 40 isolates) of Staphylococcus epidermidis isolates had multidrug antibiotic resistance. Numbers of culture-positive Staphylococcus epidermidis isolates in the male group and non-DM group were greater than those in the female and DM groups, respectively. Micrococcus luteus (n = 11, 8.8%) was found less frequently in non-hypertension group than in hypertension group.

Conclusion

Sex (Male) and the presence of hypertension and DM are risk factors for greater conjunctival sac bacterial loads. We offer a prophylactic suggestion based on the combined use of levofloxacin and rifampin. However, this approach may aggravate risk of multidrug resistance.

The role of Dexamethasone in clinical pharmaceutical treatment for patients with cataract surgery

The aim of the present study is to determine the efficacy of dexamethasone (DEX) vs. indomethacin (IND) and ciprofloxacin (CIP) in modulating immediate inflammation following cataract surgery. A total of 644 patients with cataract were recruited and inflammation was investigated during the perioperative period. The management protocol was similar in both groups. Each drug was given four times a day for 30 days starting 7 days prior to surgery. The primary efficacy criteria for evaluation were the reduction in anterior chamber (AC) flare and AC inflammation score, in addition, a different secondary efficacy and safety evaluation criteria were maintained. The results demonstrated that the average inflammation score was 1.2±0.8 in the DEX group, which was significantly lower compared with the IND (1.9±0.7) and CIP (1.8±0.6) groups. Intra-ocular pressure was decreased following treatment with DEX, while intra-ocular pressure was slightly increased in the IND (1.9±0.7) and CIP (1.8±0.6) groups. The final visual outcomes for patients postcataract surgery were clinically superior in the DEX group compared with that of the IND and CIP groups (P=0.034 and P=0.042, respectively), but there was no significant difference between the ND and CIP groups (P=0.78). Outcomes indicated that AC inflammation, conjunctival hyperaemia, corneal and lid oedema, ocular infection, pain, photophobia, and tearing were significantly improved in each group. No significant poor local tolerance or adverse reaction was observed in the DEX, IND and CIP groups. In conclusion, the outcomes of the present study suggest that DEX serves an important role in the clinical pharmaceutical treatment of patients with cataract surgery.

Importance of Lid Hygiene Before Ocular Surgery: Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Eyelid and Conjunctiva Microbiota

Objective:

To evaluate the efficacy of a cleansing eyelid wipe in reducing the microbiota present on the ocular surface before cataract surgery.

Methods:

A single-center, prospective, single-blind phase IV study was conducted at the University Complutense of Madrid. Forty-five adult patients who were scheduled for ocular surgery after treatment with commercially available eyelid wipes were consecutively enrolled. The study lasted 5 days and the patients were examined at day 0 (D0), day 3 (D3), and day 5 (D5). They received instructions to apply the eyelid wipe only to the eye subject to surgery, using the other eye as a control with no treatment. Lid and conjunctival swabs were taken on each day and microbes identified. Ocular surface microbiota was estimated by measuring the area of the agar plate occupied by the grown colonies with respect to the total available area.

Results:

Measurements at D3 and D5 showed a percent reduction of 58% and 63%, respectively, in the microbial load on the eyelid in the treated eyes (P=0.0011). There was also a reduction, although nonsignificant, in the microbiota of the conjunctiva of 72% and 69% on D3 and D5, respectively.

Conclusions:

The degree of microbiota reduction was comparable with that obtained after topical application of antibiotics in other studies. The results suggest the use of these eyelid wipes as a complementary prophylactic method before any ocular surgery.

Perioperative antibiotics for prevention of acute endophthalmitis after cataract surgery

BACKGROUND

Endophthalmitis is a severe inflammation of the anterior or posterior (or both) chambers of the eye that may be sterile or associated with infection. It is a potentially vision-threatening complication of cataract surgery. Prophylactic measures for endophthalmitis are targeted against various sources of infection.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis for endophthalmitis following cataract surgery compared with no prophylaxis or other form of prophylaxis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2016, Issue 12), Ovid MEDLINE, Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily (January 1946 to December 2016), Embase (January 1980 to December 2016), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS) (1982 to December 2016),the ISRCTN registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov), and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We used no date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 6 December 2016. We also searched for additional studies that cited any included trials using the Science Citation Index.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials that enrolled adults undergoing cataract surgery (any method and incision type) for lens opacities due to any origin. We included trials that evaluated preoperative antibiotics, intraoperative (intracameral, subconjunctival or systemic), or postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis for acute endophthalmitis. We excluded studies that evaluated antiseptic preoperative preparations using agents such as povidone iodine or antibiotics for treating acute endophthalmitis after cataract surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed abstracts and full-text articles for eligibility, assessed the risk of bias for each included study, and abstracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Five studies met the inclusion criteria for this review, including 101,005 adults and 132 endophthalmitis cases. While the sample size was very large, the heterogeneity of the study designs and modes of antibiotic delivery made it impossible to conduct a formal meta-analysis. Interventions investigated included the utility of adding vancomycin and gentamycin to the irrigating solution compared with standard balanced saline solution irrigation alone, use of intracameral cefuroxime with or without topical levofloxacin perioperatively, periocular penicillin injections and topical chloramphenicol-sulfadimidine drops compared with topical antibiotics alone, and mode of antibiotic delivery (subconjunctival versus retrobulbar injections; fixed versus separate instillation of gatifloxacin and prednisolone). The risk of bias among studies was low to unclear due to information not being reported. We identified one ongoing study.Two studies compared any antibiotic with no antibiotic. One study, which compared irrigation with antibiotics in balanced salt solution (BSS) versus BSS alone, was not sufficiently powered to detect differences in endophthalmitis between groups (very low-certainty evidence). One study found reduced risk of endophthalmitis when combining intracameral cefuroxime and topical levofloxacin (risk ratio (RR) 0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03 to 0.63; 8106 participants; high-certainty evidence) or using intracameral cefuroxime alone (RR 0.21, CI 0.06 to 0.74; 8110 participants; high-certainty evidence) compared with placebo, and an uncertain effect when using topical levofloxacin alone compared with placebo (RR 0.72, CI 0.32 to 1.61; 8103 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).Two studies found reduced risk of endophthalmitis when combining antibiotic injections during surgery and topical antibiotics compared with topical antibiotics alone (risk ratio (RR) 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12 to 0.92 (periocular penicillin and topical chloramphenicol-sulfadimidine; 6618 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); and RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.91 (intracameral cefuroxime and topical levofloxacin; 8101 participants; high-certainty evidence)).One study, which compared fixed versus separate instillation of gatifloxacin and prednisolone, was not sufficiently powered to detect differences in endophthalmitis between groups (very low-certainty evidence). Another study found no evidence of a difference in endophthalmitis when comparing subconjunctival versus retrobulbar antibiotic injections (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.32; 77,015 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).Two studies reported any visual acuity outcome; one study, which compared fixed versus separate instillation of gatifloxacin and prednisolone, reported only that mean visual acuity was the same for both groups at 20 days postoperation. In the other study, the difference in the proportion of eyes with final visual acuity greater than 20/40 following endophthalmitis between groups receiving intracameral cefuroxime with or without topical levofloxacin compared with no intracameral cefuroxime was uncertain (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.22 to 2.11; 29 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).Only one study reported adverse events (1 of 129 eyes had pupillary membrane in front of the intraocular lens and 8 eyes showed posterior capsule opacity). No study reported outcomes related to quality of life or economic outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Multiple measures for preventing endophthalmitis following cataract surgery have been studied. High-certainty evidence shows that injection with cefuroxime with or without topical levofloxacin lowers the chance of endophthalmitis after surgery, and there is moderate-certainty evidence to suggest that using antibiotic eye drops in addition to antibiotic injection probably lowers the chance of endophthalmitis compared with using injections or eye drops alone. Clinical trials with rare outcomes require very large sample sizes and are quite costly to conduct; thus, it is unlikely that many additional clinical trials will be conducted to evaluate currently available prophylaxis. Practitioners should rely on current evidence to make informed decisions regarding prophylaxis choices.