| Literature DB >> 34163127 |
Gunjan Saluja1, Namrata Sharma1, Rinky Agarwal1, H P Sharma2, Deepali Singhal1, Prafulla Kumar Maharana1, Rajesh Sinha1, Tushar Agarwal1, T Velpandian2, Jeewan S Titiyal1, Gita Satpathy3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and efficacy of intrastromal voriconazole (IS-VCZ), amphotericin B (IS-AMB) and natamycin (IS-NTM) as an adjunct to topical natamycin (NTM) in cases of recalcitrant fungal keratitis.Entities:
Keywords: intrastromal injections; recalcitrant fungal keratitis
Year: 2021 PMID: 34163127 PMCID: PMC8214110 DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S301878
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Ophthalmol ISSN: 1177-5467
Figure 1Participant flow diagram.
Baseline Demographic, Microbiological and Clinical Characteristics of All Three Groups
| Drug | Age (Years) Mean±SD | Gender Distribution | History of Trauma | Duration of Signs and Symptoms (Mean±SD) | Organism Traced Fu/As/Ca/Al/Cu |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ISVCZ (n=20) | 43.82±12.3 | 12M, 8F | 12 | 18.7±6.4days | 8/10/0/1/1 |
| ISAMB (n=20) | 39.45 ±10.0 | 14M, 6F | 13 | 20±5.5days | 8/10/1/1/0 |
| ISNTM (n=20) | 40.42±10.9 | 14M, 6F | 13 | 20.8±5.1days | 8/12/0/0/0 |
| p-value | 0.41 | 0.82 | 0.8 | 0.51 | 0.23 |
Abbreviations: ISVCZ, intrastromal voriconazole; ISAMB, intrastromal amphotericin; ISNTM, intrastromal natamycin; Fu, Fusarium; AS, Aspergillus; Ca, Candida; Al, Alternaria; Cu, Curvularia.
Baseline Features in All Three Groups
| Drug | Epithelial Defect | Stromal Infiltrate | Presence of Hypopyon | Height of Hypopyon | Retro Corneal Plaque | Visual Acuity (LogMAR) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean±SD | Mean±SD | Mean±SD | Mean±SD | |||
| ISVCZ (n=20) | 3.0 ± 1.1 | 4.0± 1.1 | 14 | 1.15±0.49 | 9/20 | 2.2±0.3 |
| ISAMB (n=20) | 3.5±1.15 | 4.3±1.05 | 13 | 1.13±0.50 | 8/20 | 2.3±0.4 |
| ISNTM (n=20) | 3.0±1.02 | 4.1±1.1 | 13 | 1.30±0.73 | 8/20 | 2.2±0.4 |
| p-value | 0.75 | 0.49 | 0.8 | 0.85 | 0.9 | 0.70 |
Abbreviations: ISVCZ, intrastromal voriconazole; ISAMB, intrastromal amphotericin; ISNTM, intrastromal natamycin.
Comparison of Post-Treatment Parameters of All Three Groups
| Drug | Success Rate | Failure | Overall Repeat Injections | Graft Infection | Duration Till Resolution | Final Scar Size (mm) | Complication | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | With 1st/2nd/3rd Injection | Epithelial Defect | Stromal Infiltrates | Hypopyon | Deep Vessels | Cataract | |||||
| ISVCZ (n=20) | 19 (95%) | 12/6/1 | 1 (5%) | 8 (40%) | 0/1 | 36.1±4.8days | 35.3±4.3days | 18.4±3.1days | 2.7±0.5 | 5 (25%) | 14 (70%) |
| ISAMB (n=20) | 18 (90%) | 11/5/2 | 2 (10%) | 9 (45%) | 1/2 | 39.2±7.2days | 36.8±7.4days | 22.3±3.4days | 2.8±0.8 | 10 (50%) | 15 (75%) |
| ISNTM (n=20) | 19 (95%) | 13/5/1 | 1 (5%) | 7 (35%) | 0/1 | 34±5.2days | 35.3±6.4days | 15±2.5days | 2.6±0.7 | 6 (30%) | 13 (65%) |
| p-value | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.8 | — | 0.02 | 0.41 | 0.75 | 0.2 | ||
Abbreviations: ISVCZ, intrastromal voriconazole; ISAMB, intrastromal amphotericin; ISNTM, intrastromal natamycin.
Figure 2(A, C and E) Clinical photographs of recalcitrant fungal keratitis at day 0 in voriconazole, natamycin and amphotericin B groups, respectively. (B, D and F) Clinical photographs of cases (depicted in A, C and E) after healing in the voriconazole, natamycin and amphotericin B groups, respectively.
Figure 3Kaplan–Meier analysis showing the duration of re-epithelialization.
Post-Treatment (BCVA) Using ITT and Per-Protocol Analysis Method
| Analysis Method | BCVA (logMAR) | ISVCZa | ISAMBb | ISNTMc | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ITT analysis | Baseline | 2.27±0.34 | 2.24 ±0.40 | 2.23±0.35 | 0.9 |
| Final follow-up | 1.2±0.38 | 1.35±0.47 | 1.2±0.37 | 0.54 | |
| Per-protocal analysis | Baseline | 2.27±0.34 | 2.24±0.40 | 2.23±0.35 | 0.9 |
| Final follow-up | 1.1±0.1 | 1.1±0.1 | 1.0±0.1 | 0.59 |
Abbreviations: BCVA, Best corrected visual acuity; ITT, intention to treat; ISVCZa, intrastromal voriconazole; ISAMBb, intrastromal amphotericin B; ISNTMc, intrastromal natamycin.
Comparison of BCVA for Central, Paracentral and Peripheral Ulcers (logMAR)
| Ulcer Location | ISVCZ | ISAMB | ISNTM | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Central | n=2 | n=2 | n=2 | |
| Baseline | 2.7±0.22 | 2.7±0.5 | 2.5±0.12 | 0.9 |
| Final follow-up | 2.15±0.12 | 2.7±0.14 | 2.08±0.13 | 0.1 |
| Paracentral | n=13 | n=14 | n=14 | |
| Baseline | 2.23±0.7 | 2.3±0.3 | 2.25±0.34 | 0.9 |
| Final follow-up | 1.28±0.6 | 1.3±0.5 | 1.27±0.7 | 0.7 |
| Peripheral | n=5 | n=4 | n=4 | |
| Baseline | 1.74±0.6 | 1.76± 0.3 | 1.85±0.4 | 0.7 |
| Final follow-up | 1±0.2 | 1.12±0.6 | 0.8±0.3 | 0.3 |
Abbreviations: ISVCZ, intrastromal voriconazole; ISAMB, intrastromal amphotericin B; ISNTM, intrastromal natamycin; BCVA, best corrected visual acuity.
Clinical Details of Patients with Treatment Failure
| Parameters | ISVCZ, n=1 | ISAMB, n=2 | ISNTM, n=1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Size of epithelial defect (mm) | 6*6 | 5*5.5 | 5.5*5 |
| 5*4 | |||
| Hypopyon height (mm) | 1 | 0.5 | 1 |
| 1.5 | |||
| BCVA Log MAR | 2.7 | Case1–2.7 | 2.3 |
| Case 2–2.7 | |||
| Duration of symptoms (days) | 30 | Case1–15 | 14 |
| Case 2–14 | |||
| Time to failure (days) | 3 | Case 1–7 | 3 |
| Case 2–3 | |||
| Depth of ulcer | >75% | Case1–75% | 3 |
| Case2 >75% |
Abbreviations: ISVCZ, intrastromal voriconazole; ISAMB, intrastromal amphotericin B; ISNTM, intrastromal natamycin.