Brucella melitensis dacryoadenitis: a case report

Ocular Involvement of Brucellosis: A Pooled Analysis Study

AIM

Brucellosis may affect the eye to varying degrees. The aim of this study was to investigate the ocular involvement of brucellosis and highlight key points.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Published literature in English language on the ocular involvement of brucellosis within last 30 years was evaluated. The PubMed international database was screened using certain keywords.

RESULTS

The study included 27 publications evaluating a total of 159 cases. The most common types of ocular involvement were uveitis (52.2%) and conjunctivitis (17.6%). Most cases had concomitant systemic brucellosis (27.7%), and the most commonly used diagnostic method was a serological test (92.4%). Of all the patients, 37.1% recovered with sequelae.

CONCLUSION

Brucellosis may cause a wide range of ophthalmic manifestations, and an overlooked or late diagnosis may also lead to the development of sequelae or loss of vision. A routine ophthalmologic examination should be performed in all patients with systemic brucellosis.

Ocular Lesions in Brucella Infection: A Review of the Literature

Ocular lesions due to Brucella infection are uncommon and easily overlooked in clinical management, but must be differentiated from non-infectious eye diseases and treated promptly to protect the patient's vision. We reviewed the relevant literature and identified 47 patients with ocular complications of Brucella infection. Among them, 28 showed ocular neuropathy, 15 presented with uveitis, and four patients displayed other ocular symptoms. Ocular symptoms accompanying Brucella infection require prompt diagnosis and treatment. The main methods of diagnosis are intraocular fluid tests and blood tests. Early diagnosis and treatment with suitable antibiotics are central to protecting the patient's vision. Notably, in terms of mechanism of injury, Brucella infection is chronic and cannot be eliminated by phagocytes, and can cause damage to the eye by inducing autoimmune reactions, antigen-antibody complex production, release of endogenous and exogenous toxins, and bacterial production of septic thrombi in the tissues. In this review, we summarize the ocular symptoms, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis of Brucella infection, and discuss the mechanisms of Brucella in ocular lesions, providing a reference for the diagnosis and treatment of Brucella ocular lesions.

Brucellar uveitis: intraocular fluids and biopsy studies

BACKGROUND

Ocular brucellosis is usually diagnosed by clinical criteria and serological tests. Little is known with regard to the ocular immunology of brucellosis and the use of intraocular diagnostic tests. We report retrospectively the laboratory findings of patients with ocular involvement associated with brucellosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with uveitis with no evident etiologic diagnosis were evaluated at the Instituto de Medicina Tropical "Alexander von Humboldt" of the Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia and the Hospital Nacional Cayetano Heredia. Patients were tested for brucellosis, tuberculosis, syphilis, toxoplasmosis, toxocariasis, and human T-cell lymphotropic virus-1. Blood and intraocular fluid samples were examined. Patients with a diagnosis of brucellar uveitis were selected as cases and patients with a diagnosis of uveitis of other etiology were included as controls. The Goldmann-Witmer coefficient was determined.

RESULTS

Twelve patients with clinical and laboratory findings suggestive of brucellar uveitis were considered as cases. Seven patients with uveitis of other etiology were selected as controls. Four (33.3%) patients with ocular brucellosis had negative ocular agglutinations and eight (66.7%) had positive agglutinations. No control cases had positive agglutinations for Brucella melitensis. The sensitivity of the test was 66.7% and the specificity 100%. Only one patient had a positive culture for B. melitensis in subretinal fluid. The Goldmann-Witmer coefficient was calculated in six cases of brucellosis uveitis and five uveitis controls. It was highly positive in three patients with ocular brucellosis. Tissue samples showed lymphoplasmacytic infiltrates.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraocular serological tests could be used to support the diagnosis of ocular brucellosis.

Ocular complications associated with brucellosis in an endemic area

PURPOSE

To report the ocular manifestations associated with brucellosis in an endemic area.

METHODS

We prospectively evaluated 147 patients with the diagnosis of brucellosis between May 1996 to May 2000 and recorded the ocular and systemic findings. The diagnosis was based on clinical findings, positive serological and bacteriological tests (Brucella agglutination test: over 1/160 titer, blood culture).

RESULTS

Thirty-eight patients (26.0%) with brucellosis had ocular complications: conjunctivitis in 26 (17.7%), anterior uveitis in six (4.1%), posterior uveitis in one (0.7%), dacryoadenitis in two (1.4%), episcleritis in three (2.1%). Three of the seven patients with uveitis had spondylitis associated with brucellosis. Osteoarticular complications in brucellosis were more frequent in the patients with ocular involvement though the difference was not statistically significant compared with patients without ocular involvement.

CONCLUSIONS

Ocular manifestations are frequent in brucellosis so an ophthalmologic examination should be routinely performed in patients with brucellosis in endemic areas.

Recurrent episcleritis associated with brucellosis

PURPOSE

To document the clinical course and the treatment of episcleritis associated with brucellosis.

METHODS

Three consecutive cases of patients with recurrent episcleritis associated with brucellosis were evaluated through clinical and laboratory data including serology (tube agglutination), blood culture, and synovial fluid culture.

RESULTS

All the patients had ingested contaminated milk and/or fresh cheese. The diagnosis of brucellosis was confirmed by high antibody titer, positive blood culture, negative synovial fluid culture and unresponsive condition to the previous nonspecific therapy for episcleritis and reactive arthritis. The patients responded well to the therapy with doxycycline and rifampicin.

CONCLUSION

We proposed that recurrent episcleritis had a co-occurence with reactive arthritis in the course of the brucellosis, and that it responded well to the antibrucellar antibiotics rather than to steroids. This also implies that brucellosis as a rule is an underlying triggering infection associated with reactive arthritis.