Donor characteristics and risk factors for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus contamination in storage medium for corneal transplantation: A 10-year retrospective study

Biological effects of stored platelet-rich plasma eye-drops in corneal wound healing

BACKGROUND/AIMS

This study aimed to assess the efficacy and sterility of stored platelet-rich plasma (PRP) eye-drops for corneal epithelial wound healing compared with those of autologous serum (AS) eye-drops.

METHODS

At our single institution, PRP and AS eye-drops were prepared using peripheral blood obtained from six healthy volunteers and stored at 4°C. Platelet and leucocyte counts and transforming growth factor (TGF)-β1, epidermal growth factor (EGF), and fibronectin levels were assessed during storage for up to 4 weeks. Sterility was assessed by culturing 4-week poststorage samples. PRP, AS, and phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) eye-drop efficacies were compared using corneal epithelial wound healing assays in vitro and in vivo and monitoring wound areas under a microscope every 3 hours.

RESULTS

Higher platelet and lower leucocyte counts were seen in PRP than in whole blood on the day of preparation. After storage, TGF-β1, EGF, and fibronectin levels were significantly higher in PRP than in AS eye-drops. In vitro and in vivo, PRP eye-drops used on the day of preparation significantly promoted corneal epithelial wound healing compared with PBS. Moreover, PRP eye-drops stored for 4 weeks significantly promoted corneal wound healing compared with PBS and AS eye-drops.

CONCLUSION

PRP eye-drops stored at 4°C for 4 weeks promoted corneal epithelial wound healing with higher levels of growth factors than those observed in AS eye-drops, while maintaining sterility, suggesting that this preparation satisfies the unmet medical needs in the treatment of refractory keratoconjunctival epithelial disorders.

Hypochlorous acid hygiene solution in patients affected by blepharitis: a prospective randomised study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

To investigate the clinical outcomes and antimicrobial activity of an hypochlorous acid hygiene solution compared with hyaluronic acid wipes for blepharitis treatment in patients with dry eye disease (DED).

METHODS

This study involved 48 eyes of 48 patients affected by blepharitis with mild to moderate DED. 24 patients were treated with a hypochlorous acid hygiene solution (HOCL group) and 24 patients were treated with hyaluronic acid wipes (HYAL group) for a period of 4 weeks. The following clinical outcomes were assessed before (V0) and after the treatment period (V1): non-invasive keratograph break up time (NIK-BUT), tear film BUT (TF-BUT) tear meniscus height (TMH), Keratograph meibography, Meibomian Gland Yield Secretion Score (MGYSS), Corneal Staining Score (CSS), Schirmer test I, Keratograph conjunctival redness score and Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI). Moreover, microbiological analysis of upper and lower eyelid margins was performed at V0 both before and 5 min after treatment.

RESULTS

After 1-month NIK-BUT and TF-BUT significantly increased in HOCL group, while they did not show a statistically significant difference in HYAL group compared with baseline. OSDI, TMH and MGYSS showed a significant difference in both groups, while Schirmer test, meibography, CSS and conjunctival redness score did not significantly change in both groups. Bacterial load showed a significant reduction in both groups, more pronounced in HOCL group compared with HYAL group.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypochlorous acid hygiene solution can be securely employed in blepharitis treatment considering the satisfying clinical outcomes and antimicrobial activity compared with hyaluronic acid wipes.

Attitudes and Awareness of Cornea Specialists and Oculoplastic Surgeons toward Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Decolonization

Background: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) decolonization is widely utilized in many medical subspecialities to reduce surgical site infections, but routine ophthalmic implementation has been limited. The aim of this study was to investigate the attitudes and actual practice of corneal specialists and oculoplastic surgeons toward MRSA decolonization as a preventive measure in ophthalmic surgery. Materials and Methods: A web-based survey was sent to cornea specialists and oculoplastic surgeons to assess their knowledge, beliefs, and practices regarding MRSA prophylaxis and the use of MRSA decolonization to prevent post-operative infections. Results: A total of 180 surgeons participated in this study: 71% of respondents agreed that MRSA colonization plays a role in post-operative infection of the eye and adnexal structures; 65% stated that MRSA decolonization could help prevent MRSA infection. Although 41% of respondents would change their management in response to a positive pre-operative MRSA screening result, only 18% performed pre-operative screening. Seventeen percent of respondents indicated that they offer pre-operative decolonization for MRSA-positive patients; the most frequently applied technique was the use of nasal antibiotic agents such as mupirocin, followed by antiseptic baths. Peri-operative MRSA prophylaxis was used by 18% of respondents; pre-operative MRSA decolonization was used in conjunction by 8.5 % of respondents. Conclusions: Although MRSA decolonization has been validated in fields outside of ophthalmology, there has not been widespread adoption of this practice among oculoplastic surgeons and cornea specialists. Prospective MRSA decolonization ophthalmic studies are necessary if evidence-based management guidelines are to be developed.