PURPOSE: The aim of this paper was to identify a possible association between allergic conjunctivitis and Chlamydia trachomatis infection. METHODS: A prospective study was carried out in 104 eyes of 52 patients with diagnosis of vernal conjunctivitis and atopic keratoconjunctivitis. Conjunctival cytology was performed in all the 52 patients, once it can evidence eosinophils presence and inclusions corpuscles in the conjunctival scraping smear, as well as the direct immunofluorescence that is the choice exam for Chlamydia trachomatis infection confirmation. All procedures were approved by the Institutional Review Board Ethics Committee. RESULTS: Of the 52 patients, 41 (78.8%) presented vernal conjunctivitis and 11 (21.2%) atopic keratoconjunctivitis. Forty-one patients (78.8%) were male and 11 (21.2%) female. The ages varied from 3 to 19 years, with an average of 9.8 years. Regarding racial distribution, 16 (30.8%) patients were caucasian, 14 (26.9%) were black and 22 (42.3%) were brown. Regarding systemic allergic diseases, it was observed that 25 (48.1%) patients presented asthma, 20 (38.5%) allergic rhinitis and 5 (9.6%) atopic dermatitis. The main symptoms complained by the patients were coryza (59.6%), ocular itching (98.1%), burning (61.5%), tearing (65.3%) and photophobia (61.5%). The main clinical signs were: ocular hyperemia (100%), bilaterality (100%), superior tarsal papilla (92.3%) and mucous secretion (82.7%). The cytology of the conjunctival scrapings found eosinophil in 86.5% of the cases. Only seven patients did not present eosinophils in the conjunctival scrapings. Three patients (5.8%) presented positive immunofluorescence for Chlamydia, evidencing an association between allergic conjunctivitis and trachoma. CONCLUSION: It is important to determine the simultaneous coexistence of Chlamydia trachomatis and allergic conjunctivitis, due to the possibility to change the visual prognostic and of symptoms potentiation in case of double attack. Therefore, it is necessary to perform direct immunofluorescence for the correct diagnosis in patients with allergic conjunctivitis.
PURPOSE: The aim of this paper was to identify a possible association between allergic conjunctivitis and Chlamydia trachomatis infection. METHODS: A prospective study was carried out in 104 eyes of 52 patients with diagnosis of vernal conjunctivitis and atopic keratoconjunctivitis. Conjunctival cytology was performed in all the 52 patients, once it can evidence eosinophils presence and inclusions corpuscles in the conjunctival scraping smear, as well as the direct immunofluorescence that is the choice exam for Chlamydia trachomatis infection confirmation. All procedures were approved by the Institutional Review Board Ethics Committee. RESULTS: Of the 52 patients, 41 (78.8%) presented vernal conjunctivitis and 11 (21.2%) atopic keratoconjunctivitis. Forty-one patients (78.8%) were male and 11 (21.2%) female. The ages varied from 3 to 19 years, with an average of 9.8 years. Regarding racial distribution, 16 (30.8%) patients were caucasian, 14 (26.9%) were black and 22 (42.3%) were brown. Regarding systemic allergic diseases, it was observed that 25 (48.1%) patients presented asthma, 20 (38.5%) allergic rhinitis and 5 (9.6%) atopic dermatitis. The main symptoms complained by the patients were coryza (59.6%), ocular itching (98.1%), burning (61.5%), tearing (65.3%) and photophobia (61.5%). The main clinical signs were: ocular hyperemia (100%), bilaterality (100%), superior tarsal papilla (92.3%) and mucous secretion (82.7%). The cytology of the conjunctival scrapings found eosinophil in 86.5% of the cases. Only seven patients did not present eosinophils in the conjunctival scrapings. Three patients (5.8%) presented positive immunofluorescence for Chlamydia, evidencing an association between allergic conjunctivitis and trachoma. CONCLUSION: It is important to determine the simultaneous coexistence of Chlamydia trachomatis and allergic conjunctivitis, due to the possibility to change the visual prognostic and of symptoms potentiation in case of double attack. Therefore, it is necessary to perform direct immunofluorescence for the correct diagnosis in patients with allergic conjunctivitis.