Topical Chlorhexidine 0.2% versus Topical Natamycin 5% for the Treatment of Fungal Keratitis in Nepal: A Randomized Controlled Noninferiority Trial

Antifungal susceptibility profiles for fungal isolates from corneas and contact lenses in the United Kingdom

OBJECTIVE

To report the identification and results of susceptibility testing for fungal isolates from the cornea or contact lens care systems.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective epidemiological study, we searched the results of fungal cultures from cornea or contact lens systems referred for identification and susceptibility testing to the United Kingdom National Mycology Reference Laboratory between October 2016 and March 2022. For each fungal isolate, we recorded the genus and species of the fungus and the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) to six antifungal agents available to treat corneal infection (amphotericin, econazole, itraconazole, natamycin, posaconazole, and voriconazole).

RESULTS

There were 600 isolates from 585 patients, comprising 374 (62%) from corneal samples and 226 from contact lenses and care systems, of which 414 (69%) isolates were moulds (filamentous fungi) and 186 (31%) were yeasts. The most frequent moulds isolated were Fusarium spp (234 isolates, 39%) and Aspergillus spp (62, 10%). The most frequent yeasts isolated were Candida spp (112, 19%), predominantly Candida parapsilosis (65, 11%) and Candida albicans (33, 6%), with 35 isolates (6%) of Meyerozyma guilliermondii. In vitro susceptibility was greatest for natamycin (347 moulds tested, mode 4 mg/L, range 0.25-64 mg/L; 98 yeasts tested, mode 4 mg/L, range 0.5-32 mg/L), with susceptibility for 94% for moulds and 99% yeasts. Of the 16 isolates interpreted as highly resistant to natamycin (MIC ≥16 mg/L), 13 were Aspergillus flavus complex.

CONCLUSIONS

In vitro susceptibility supports the use of natamycin for the empiric treatment of fungal keratitis in the UK.

Antimicrobial resistance in topical treatments for microbial keratitis: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

There is evidence for increased resistance against the antimicrobials used to treat keratitis. This review aims to provide global and regional prevalence estimates of antimicrobial resistance in corneal isolates and the range of minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) with their associated resistance breakpoints.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We report this protocol following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidelines. We will conduct an electronic bibliographic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. Eligible studies will report in any language data for the resistance or MIC for antimicrobials against bacterial, fungal or amoebic organisms isolated from suspected microbial keratitis. Studies that only report on viral keratitis will not be included. There will be no time restrictions on the date of publication. Screening for eligible studies, assessment of risk of bias and data extraction will be conducted by two reviewers independently, using predefined inclusion criteria and prepiloted data extraction forms. We will resolve disagreements between the reviewers by discussion and, if required, a third (senior) reviewer will arbitrate. We will assess the risk of bias using a tool validated in prevalence studies. The certainty of the evidence will be assessed using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Pooled proportion estimates will be calculated using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity will be assessed using the I2 statistic. We will explore differences between Global Burden of Disease regions and temporal trends.

ETHICS APPROVAL AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval is not required as this is a protocol for a systematic review of published data. The findings of this review will be published in an open-access, peer-reviewed journal.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023331126.

Management of Filamentous Fungal Keratitis: A Pragmatic Approach

Filamentous fungal infections of the cornea known as filamentous fungal keratitis (FK) are challenging to treat. Topical natamycin 5% is usually first-line treatment following the results of several landmark clinical trials. However, even when treated intensively, infections may progress to corneal perforation. Current topical antifungals are not always effective and are often unavailable. Alternatives topical therapies to natamycin include voriconazole, chlorhexidine, amphotericin B and econazole. Surgical therapy, typically in the form of therapeutic penetrating keratoplasty, may be required for severe cases or following corneal perforation. Alternative treatment strategies such as intrastromal or intracameral injections of antifungals may be used. However, there is often no clear treatment strategy and the evidence to guide therapy is often lacking. This review describes the different treatment options and their evidence and provides a pragmatic approach to the management of fungal keratitis, particularly for clinicians working in tropical, low-resource settings where fungal keratitis is most prevalent.

Diagnosis of Fungal Keratitis in Low-Income Countries: Evaluation of Smear Microscopy, Culture, and In Vivo Confocal Microscopy in Nepal

Clinically diagnosing fungal keratitis (FK) is challenging; diagnosis can be assisted by investigations including in vivo confocal microscopy (IVCM), smear microscopy, and culture. The aim of this study was to estimate the sensitivity in detecting fungal keratitis (FK) using IVCM, smear microscopy, and culture in a setting with a high prevalence of FK. In this cross-sectional study nested within a prospective cohort study, consecutive microbial keratitis (MK) patients attending a tertiary-referral eye hospital in south-eastern Nepal between June 2019 and November 2020 were recruited. IVCM and corneal scrapes for smear microscopy and culture were performed using a standardised protocol. Smear microscopy was performed using potassium hydroxide (KOH), Gram stain, and calcofluor white. The primary outcomes were sensitivities with 95% confidence intervals [95% CI] for IVCM, smear microscopy and culture, and for each different microscopy stain independently, to detect FK compared to a composite referent. We enrolled 642 patients with MK; 468/642 (72.9%) were filamentous FK, 32/642 (5.0%) were bacterial keratitis and 64/642 (10.0%) were mixed bacterial-filamentous FK, with one yeast infection (0.16%). No organism was identified in 77/642 (12.0%). Smear microscopy had the highest sensitivity (90.7% [87.9-93.1%]), followed by IVCM (89.8% [86.9-92.3%]) and culture (75.7% [71.8-79.3%]). Of the three smear microscopy stains, KOH had the highest sensitivity (85.3% [81.9-88.4%]), followed by Gram stain (83.2% [79.7-86.4%]) and calcofluor white (79.1% [75.4-82.5%]). Smear microscopy and IVCM were the most sensitive tools for identifying FK in our cohort. In low-resource settings we recommend clinicians perform corneal scrapes for microscopy using KOH and Gram staining. Culture remains an important tool to diagnose bacterial infection, identify causative fungi and enable antimicrobial susceptibility testing.