ENDOGENOUS ENDOPHTHALMITIS IN WESTERN AUSTRALIA: A Sixteen-Year Retrospective Study

Pavindran Arumugam Gounder, David Matthew Hille, Ying Jo Khoo, Ravinder Singh Phagura, Fred Kuanfu Chen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

9 Citations (Web of Science)

Abstract

PURPOSE: To review the clinical features, microbiology spectrum, management, and outcomes of patients with endogenous endophthalmitis in Western Australia over a 16-year period. METHODS: This is a retrospective chart review of all patients with endogenous endophthalmitis who presented to all tertiary ophthalmology departments between 2000 and 2015 in Western Australia. RESULTS: Sixty-six eyes of 57 patients with endogenous endophthalmitis were identified, and follow-up data were available for a mean of 554 days. The average frequency was 1.6 per 1,000,000 population per year. Diabetes mellitus (33%) and intravenous drug use (30%) were the most common risk factors. Concurrent systemic infections included urinary tract infection (28%), pneumonia (23%), and endocarditis (21%). Among culture-positive cases (93%), 57% were bacterial and 43% were fungal. Visual acuity improved in 33 (50%) and declined in 15 eyes (22.7%). Baseline visual acuity and the presence of Gram-negative or filamentous fungi were the only predictors of final visual acuity (P = 0.023 and P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: The population frequency of endogenous endophthalmitis has not changed over 16 years despite the changing profile of pathogen and risk factors. Similar to previous studies in Asian and Western countries, visual and anatomical prognosis depends on initial visual acuity and isolated pathogen. Gram-negative and filamentous fungi culture predicted a worse visual outcome.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)908-918
Number of pages11
JournalRetina (Philadelphia, Pa.)
Volume40
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 May 2020

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'ENDOGENOUS ENDOPHTHALMITIS IN WESTERN AUSTRALIA: A Sixteen-Year Retrospective Study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this