- •Corneal Disease
- •Preface
- •Contents
- •Contributors
- •Core Messages
- •Organisms
- •Detection
- •Acid Fast Smears
- •Culture Media
- •Molecular Tests
- •Nucleic Acid Hybridization Probes
- •Line Probes
- •DNA Sequencing
- •FISH (Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization) Assay
- •DNA Microarray
- •Pulse Field Gel Electrophoresis (PFGE)
- •Management
- •Clinical Diagnosis
- •Medical Therapy
- •Surgical Intervention
- •Penetrating Keratoplasty
- •Corneal Cross-Linking
- •Summary for the Clinician
- •References
- •Core Messages
- •Introduction
- •Epidemiology
- •Visual Morbidity
- •Documentation
- •Causative Factors
- •Causative Bacteria
- •Investigation of Keratitis
- •Laboratory Diagnosis: Susceptibility Testing
- •Susceptibility and Resistance of Bacterial Isolates
- •Treatment: Antimicrobials
- •Current Antimicrobials in Use
- •The Fluoroquinolones
- •Aminoglycosides
- •Cephalosporins
- •Other Antimicrobials Used
- •Development of Existing and New Classes of Drugs
- •Tigecycline
- •Linezolid
- •Meropenem
- •Combination Therapy
- •Drug Delivery to the Cornea
- •Novel Methods of Drug Delivery to the Cornea
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •3: Heredity of Keratoconus
- •Introduction
- •Is Keratoconus a Heritable or Genetic Disease?
- •Mutational Screening of Candidate Genes in Keratoconus
- •Visual System Homeobox Gene 1 (VSX1)
- •Superoxide Dismutase 1 (SOD1)
- •Interleukin 1 (IL1) Superfamily
- •Collagen Genes
- •Genetic Mapping in Keratoconus
- •Genetics of Keratoconus – Mendelian or Complex?
- •References
- •4: Advance in Corneal Imaging
- •Introduction
- •In Vivo Confocal Microscopy (IVCM)
- •Principles of Confocal Microscopy
- •The Normal Cornea
- •Clinical Applications
- •Infectious Keratitis
- •Corneal Dystrophies
- •Refractive Surgery
- •Corneal Surgery
- •Other Clinical Applications
- •Limitations of IVCM
- •Anterior Segment Ocular Coherence Tomography (OCT)
- •Clinical Applications
- •Corneal Thickness Assessment
- •Refractive Surgery
- •Corneal Grafts
- •Limitations
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Core Messages
- •Introduction
- •“Angiogenic Privilege of the Cornea” or “How Does the Normal Corneal Maintain Its Avascularity?”
- •General Mechanisms
- •Corneal Hemangiogenesis After Low-Risk Keratoplasty
- •Corneal Hemangiogenesis After High-Risk Keratoplasty
- •Corneal Lymphangiogenesis: Essential for Corneal Graft Rejection
- •Corneal Lymphangiogenesis in Dry Eye
- •Imaging of Corneal Lymphatic Vessels
- •Novel Anti(lymph)Angiogenic Treatment Options at the Cornea
- •Current Treatment Options for Immature Corneal (Blood and Lymphatic) Vessels
- •Steroids
- •Anti-VEGFs (Bevazicumab, Ranibuzumab, Pegaptanib, VEGF Trap)
- •Anti-IRS 1-Strategies (Antisense Oligonucleotides Against IRS 1)
- •Treatment Options for Mature Corneal Vessels
- •Unmet Needs and Future Directions
- •References
- •Core Messages
- •Introduction
- •Retrieval of Donor Tissue
- •Technical Aspects
- •Microbiological Aspects
- •Tissue Evaluation Aspects
- •Corneal Storage
- •Moist Chamber Storage of the Donor Eye
- •Technical Aspects
- •Storage Period
- •Microbiological Safety
- •Tissue Evaluation
- •Hypothermic Storage of the Corneoscleral Button
- •Technical Aspects
- •Storage Period
- •Microbiological Safety
- •Tissue Evaluation
- •Organ Culture (Normothermic Storage) of the Corneoscleral Button
- •Technical Aspects
- •Storage Period
- •Microbiological Safety
- •Tissue Evaluation
- •Other Aspects
- •Pre-cutting of Corneal Tissue for Endothelial Keratoplasty (EK)
- •Microkeratome Cutting
- •Femtosecond Laser Cutting
- •Stripping of Descemet’s Membrane with Endothelium
- •Donor Considerations for EK
- •References
- •7: Infant Keratoplasty
- •Core Messages
- •Introduction
- •Indications for Surgery
- •Visual Outcome
- •Patient Selection
- •Patient Assessment
- •Ancillary Testing
- •Donor Tissue
- •Intraoperative Considerations
- •Concurrent Surgical Procedures
- •Postoperative Considerations
- •Suture Management
- •Optical Correction and Amblyopia Therapy
- •Postoperative Complications
- •Glaucoma
- •Graft Rejection
- •Graft Failure
- •Alternatives to Penetrating Keratoplasty
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Index
4 |
D. Miller et al. |
|
|
Laboratory confirmation is hindered by delay in culturing, prior therapy, quality and quantity of specimen, inexperienced personnel, and microbial growth rate [1, 3, 7]. Lack of simple, rapid, and accurate methods also adds to the delay in laboratory identification and confirmation.
Organisms
Among the more than 100 mycobacterial species, less than 20 have been associated with microbial keratitis (Table 1.1) [8, 9]. A minimal of 300 cases of mycobacterial keratitis have been reported since the first case by Turner and Stinson in 1965. Nontuberculous species (NTM), also referred to as “atypical mycobacteria” or mycobacteria other than tuberculosis (MOTT) are the most common. The majority of these continue to be rapidly growing, saprophytic species with diverse environmental reservoirs including fresh, salt, and recreational waters, soil, animals and healthy colonized human. Members of the Mycobacteria chelonae complex (Runyoun Group IV) have been the most frequent pathogens, constituting 63% and 60% of LASIK and traumatic inoculation cases, respectively (Table 1.1).
True pathogens M. tuberculosis and M. leprae can directly invade corneal tissue but disease usually results via systemic dissemination or accidental direct inoculation. Less than 5% of patients with M. tuberculosis will develop keratitis [10–12]. The clinical presentation is usually an allergic reaction. The numbers are a little higher for patients suffering from leprosy due to direct corneal invasion and ulceration associated with corneal anesthesia [13]. Although rare, these pathogens cause significant morbidity and mortality in endemic areas and are increasingly encountered in the rising population of HIV patients [14].
Nontuberculous species are ubiquitous in nature and resistant to traditional mycobacterial drugs as well as chlorine and other disinfectants. Increasingly, sporadic single cases or outbreaks are associated with unusually or slow growing mycobacteria such as M. skulgai, M. immunogenum, and/or M. terrae. The Runyon classification with modifications is still used to characterize these infections. The classification of isolates is based on the time it takes for colonies to appear on solid media from a subculture rather than growth from clinical samples. Common rapid growers (M. abscessus, M. chelonae, M. fortuitum) usually grow from subculture within 3–7 days while growth after subculture for the slower growers taking up to 8 weeks. All four Runyon groups have been associated with microbial keratitis.
Detection
Conventional techniques for the identification of mycobacterial species employ a battery of phenotypic (growth rate, colony morphology) characteristics and biochemical tests. These are time consuming, labor intensive, expensive, and often inconclusive. The delay in laboratory recovery and identification may impede clinical diagnosis [2, 15–17]. An updated algorithm using molecular and traditional
1 New Aspects in the Diagnosis and Therapy of Mycobacterial Keratitis |
5 |
|
|
Corneal Scrapings
Corneal biopsy Tissue Sections- (stains,PNAFISH)
AFB Stains |
Culture |
Nucleic Acid Tests* |
|||
Ziehl-Nelson |
Media(solid) |
|
PCR |
||
Kinyoun Stain |
Chocolate Agar |
DNA Sequencing |
|||
Fluorescent Microscopy |
5% Sheep Blood Agar |
|
PNA-FISH |
||
(Auramine,Rhodamine) |
Lowenstein Jensen |
Line Probes |
|||
|
|
Media (Liquid) |
(Genotype, INNO LiPA) |
||
|
|
(MGIT, Middlebrook) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
molecular |
||
|
|
Identification |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conventional |
|
|
|
HPLC (High Performance Liquid |
|
Growth Rate |
|||
|
Pigmentation |
||||
Chromatography)-rarely used |
|
||||
|
Biochemicals |
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
Antimicrobial Profile |
||
Fig. 1.4 Algorithm for mycobacterial keratitis detection and identification
methods for recovery and identification of mycobacterial species associated with mycobacterial keratitis is outlined in Fig. 1.4. Sample size, available services, and laboratory personnel may compromise full implementation of techniques.
New aspects for the detection and identification of mycobacteria in or recovered from ocular samples include use of rapid fluorescent acid fast stains, inoculation of enhanced culture media, and implementation of a variety of nucleic acid-based assays coupled with hybridization procedures and DNA sequencing.
Acid Fast Smears
Acid fast stains and recovery on solid media continue to be the cornerstones for laboratory and clinical confirmation of mycobacterial keratitis. The carbol fuschin-based
6 |
D. Miller et al. |
|
|
stains (Kinyoun (cold) and Ziehl Neelsen (hot)) are important tools in the rapid and direct detection of acid fast bacilli in corneal scrapings, biopsies, and material collected from under the LASIK flap. The basic stain includes flooding a heatfixed slide with carbol fuschin for 3–5 min, decolorization with acid alcohol, wash step, and application of a 1-min counterstain. A modified Kinyoun stain using a weaker decolorizer may be more sensitive for confirming the rapidly growing mycobacteria due to their wearker or inconsistent staining with the first two preparations (<10%) [9, 18].
Although fluorescent stains (auramine or auramine–rhodamine) are generally more rapid and sensitive than the carbol fuschin stains, many of the rapid growers may not stain with these fluorochromes [9, 18]. In positive smears, acid-fast organisms will appear orange-yellow in a black background or yellow-green in the absence of the counterstain. In the review of mycobacteria keratitis cases by Huang, only 50% of culture positive cases were detected by smear [5]. Limitations of these studies is the requirement for the presence of a high number of organisms (³103–4 CFU/ml) required for positivity. Initial corneal scrapings/smears contain numbers below this threshold and are often acid fast negative. Correlation between smears and culture is poor.
A recent, new modification of the auramine stain, Rapid-Auramine O, (Scientific Device, Inc, Des Plaines, IL) provides for quicker (2 min vs. 22 min) and more sensitive (brighter, less debris) screening of mycobacteria from clinical samples including M. fortuitum (100%) and M. chelonae (80%) [19]. This might be useful in evaluating or screening ocular samples collected from LASIK flaps or corneal biopsies where the infecting microorganism may be above the stain’s detection threshold.
Culture Media
Both liquid and solid media are recommended for optimal recovery and quicker identification of mycobacteria species. The most frequently involved pathogens (the rapid growers) are recovered from corneal scrapings, tissues, or biopsy within 3 days on routine solid media (chocolate, blood agar, Sabouraud agars) and special media (Lowenstein-Jensen and Middlebrook agars) (Figs. 1.5 and 1.6). Dependent on the quality and quantity of sample, initial recovery of mycobacterial species can take up to 10 days.
Slow growers (Runyoun Groups I-III) and Mycobacterium tuberculosis grow poorly or not at all on routine laboratory media. Scrapings should be inoculated on to Lowenstein-Jensen, Middlebrook, or Ogawa media for recovery. Recovery rates range from 2 to 8 weeks. Broth media (MGIT, Middlebrook, and Bactec media) have been used to recover mycobacteria from corneal samples. Organisms were recovered on average within 3 days from inoculation. M. leprae has not been grown on artificial laboratory media.
A new type of solid media has been developed for the recovery, identification, and susceptibility of mycobacteria species. TK Medium (M. tuberculosis complex)
1 New Aspects in the Diagnosis and Therapy of Mycobacterial Keratitis |
7 |
|
|
Fig. 1.5 M. chelonae – chocolate-day 10
Fig. 1.6 Mycobacteria and
Nocardia species on Lowenstein-Jensen agar (14 day growth). (a) M. avium-intracellulare, (b) M. fortuitum, (c) Nocardia asteroides
and TK PNB (MOTT) allows for rapid identification of mycobacterial species based on colorimetric changes in the media. The color changes are read manually or in an automated system. Mycobacteria species can be recovered 5–18 days earlier than with conventional solid media. Antituberculosis drugs have been incorporated into
