Mathias Roth1, Paul Goerke2, Christoph Holtmann2, Andreas Frings2, Colin R MacKenzie3, Gerd Geerling2. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, Heinrich-Heine University Duesseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Duesseldorf, Germany. mathias.roth@med.uni-duesseldorf.de. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, Heinrich-Heine University Duesseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Duesseldorf, Germany. 3. Institute of Medical Microbiology and Hospital Hygiene of the University Hospital Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Aim of this study was to evaluate the frequencies, trends, and antibiotic resistance of bacteria collected from ocular surface or contact lens material in a German tertiary referral center from 2009 to 2019. METHODS: Microbiological data from 2009 to 2019 was analyzed. Culture-dependent microbial identification and analysis of antibiotic sensitivity was completed by the Institute of Microbiology. Statistical analysis of age- and sex-specific differences as well as changes in the microbial spectrum and resistance over the study period was performed with GraphPad Prism 9.0 applying nonparametric tests (level of significance: p ≦ 0.05). RESULTS: A total of 6361 specimens were analyzed. Positivity rate was 18.6%. Sixty-three percent (n = 680) of the bacterial isolates were derived from ocular surface and 37% (n = 399) from contact lens material. The ratio of gram-negative bacteria was significantly higher in contact lens material. Multiresistant bacteria showed a significant increase with patient age (p < 0.0001). An overall increase in resistance to levofloxacin (p = 0.0239) was detected. Only 2.4% and 3.1% isolates were resistant to a combination of moxifloxacin and gentamicin, respectively, levofloxacin and gentamicin. CONCLUSIONS: The reported bacterial spectrum is similar to comparable centers. Our data show that it should not be assumed that the newest classes of antibiotics have the best efficacy or lowest resistance levels. In suspected bacterial conjunctivitis, we propose using gentamicin as first-line therapy. In therapy refractive cases and in involvement of the cornea, we recommend a combination of gentamicin and ofloxacin or moxifloxacin. Overall, the evaluated organisms showed good sensitivity to the regularly used antibiotics.
PURPOSE: Aim of this study was to evaluate the frequencies, trends, and antibiotic resistance of bacteria collected from ocular surface or contact lens material in a German tertiary referral center from 2009 to 2019. METHODS: Microbiological data from 2009 to 2019 was analyzed. Culture-dependent microbial identification and analysis of antibiotic sensitivity was completed by the Institute of Microbiology. Statistical analysis of age- and sex-specific differences as well as changes in the microbial spectrum and resistance over the study period was performed with GraphPad Prism 9.0 applying nonparametric tests (level of significance: p ≦ 0.05). RESULTS: A total of 6361 specimens were analyzed. Positivity rate was 18.6%. Sixty-three percent (n = 680) of the bacterial isolates were derived from ocular surface and 37% (n = 399) from contact lens material. The ratio of gram-negative bacteria was significantly higher in contact lens material. Multiresistant bacteria showed a significant increase with patient age (p < 0.0001). An overall increase in resistance to levofloxacin (p = 0.0239) was detected. Only 2.4% and 3.1% isolates were resistant to a combination of moxifloxacin and gentamicin, respectively, levofloxacin and gentamicin. CONCLUSIONS: The reported bacterial spectrum is similar to comparable centers. Our data show that it should not be assumed that the newest classes of antibiotics have the best efficacy or lowest resistance levels. In suspected bacterial conjunctivitis, we propose using gentamicin as first-line therapy. In therapy refractive cases and in involvement of the cornea, we recommend a combination of gentamicin and ofloxacin or moxifloxacin. Overall, the evaluated organisms showed good sensitivity to the regularly used antibiotics.
Authors: S Z Tan; A Walkden; L Au; C Fullwood; A Hamilton; A Qamruddin; M Armstrong; A K Brahma; F Carley Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2017-04-28 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: Ronald C Gentile; Salil Shukla; Mahendra Shah; David C Ritterband; Michael Engelbert; Andrew Davis; Dan-Ning Hu Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2014-04-02 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Hugo Y Hsu; Benjamin Ernst; Eric J Schmidt; Rohit Parihar; Chelsea Horwood; Sean L Edelstein Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2018-10-09 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Darren Shu Jeng Ting; Charlotte Shan Ho; Jessica Cairns; Bhavesh P Gopal; Ahmad Elsahn; Mouhamed Al-Aqaba; Tim Boswell; Dalia G Said; Harminder S Dua Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2020-11-12 Impact factor: 4.456