June 2022
Volume 63, Issue 7
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2022
Herpetic keratitis following penetrating keratoplasty: clinical and microbiological features
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Jesus Guerrero
    Cornea, External Diseases and Refractive Surgery, Instituto de Oftalmologia Fundacion Conde de Valenciana IAP, Mexico City, Mexico City, Mexico
  • David Jimenez-Collado
    Cornea, External Diseases and Refractive Surgery, Instituto de Oftalmologia Fundacion Conde de Valenciana IAP, Mexico City, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Daniel Chavez Velazquez
    Cornea, External Diseases and Refractive Surgery, Instituto de Oftalmologia Fundacion Conde de Valenciana IAP, Mexico City, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Nicole Macriz-Romero
    Cornea, External Diseases and Refractive Surgery, Instituto de Oftalmologia Fundacion Conde de Valenciana IAP, Mexico City, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Fabiola Anaya Barragán
    Cornea, External Diseases and Refractive Surgery, Instituto de Oftalmologia Fundacion Conde de Valenciana IAP, Mexico City, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Carlos Adolfo Muller Morales
    Cornea, External Diseases and Refractive Surgery, Instituto de Oftalmologia Fundacion Conde de Valenciana IAP, Mexico City, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Alejandro Navas
    Cornea, External Diseases and Refractive Surgery, Instituto de Oftalmologia Fundacion Conde de Valenciana IAP, Mexico City, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Arturo Ramirez-Miranda
    Cornea, External Diseases and Refractive Surgery, Instituto de Oftalmologia Fundacion Conde de Valenciana IAP, Mexico City, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Enrique O Graue-Hernandez
    Cornea, External Diseases and Refractive Surgery, Instituto de Oftalmologia Fundacion Conde de Valenciana IAP, Mexico City, Mexico City, Mexico
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Jesus Guerrero None; David Jimenez-Collado None; Daniel Chavez Velazquez None; Nicole Macriz-Romero None; Fabiola Anaya Barragán None; Carlos Muller Morales None; Alejandro Navas None; Arturo Ramirez-Miranda None; Enrique Graue-Hernandez None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2022, Vol.63, 4360 – A0297. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Jesus Guerrero, David Jimenez-Collado, Daniel Chavez Velazquez, Nicole Macriz-Romero, Fabiola Anaya Barragán, Carlos Adolfo Muller Morales, Alejandro Navas, Arturo Ramirez-Miranda, Enrique O Graue-Hernandez; Herpetic keratitis following penetrating keratoplasty: clinical and microbiological features. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2022;63(7):4360 – A0297.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : The present study aims to describe clinical outcomes after infectious keratitis following penetrating keratoplasty (PKP)

Methods : Retrospective consecutive clinical case series study carried out from 2001 to 2018. Clinical records were reviewed in which subjects with herpetic keratitis with previous PKP were identified. Diagnosis was done following clinical characteristics. Analyzed variables were previous ocular surgeries and medications and ocular surface disease were recorded. Treatment characteristics, indications for surgery and clinical outcomes were also noted. Descriptive statistics, means, and SD were used for continuous variables; percentages were used to describe categorical variables. P, 0.05 was regarded as evidence of significance. All analyses were done with STATA v.10 software.

Results : A total of 22 cases were recorded. Mean age was 43.04 years, 14 patients (63.63%) were male. Mean time of herpetic keratitis after PKP was 35.59 months (2.96 years). Of the 22 cases 19 (86.36%) had just one PKP, 3 patients (13.63%) had 2 or more PKP’s. 15 patients (68.18%) had history of herpetic keratitis before the PKP. The main indication for PKP among patients with history of herpetic keratitis were: stromal keratitis in 14 patients (93.33%) and just one case of endothelial keratitis (6.66%). Of the 15 patients who presented herpetic keratitis previous to the PKP only 3 (20%) were on antiviral suppression therapy. Of the 22 patients who presented herpetic keratitis, 17 (77.27%) presented epithelial form and 5 patients (22.72%) presented herpetic keratouveitis .Of the 22 patients, 13 (59.09%) had clear grafts, the remaining 9 grafts were already in failure (40%). 8 (61.53%) remained clear after the event, 5 (38.46%) resulted in marked inflammation, leading to graft failure. Before the infectious event 18 patients (81%) were active steroid users, 4 patients (17.39%) were on prostaglandin analogues and at the time of the event all the patients were treated with: acyclovir 800mg 5 times daily and lubricant drops.

Conclusions : Herpetic infectious keratitis following PKP is an important cause of graft failure. Patients with PKP require close monitoring to identify risk factors for developing infectious keratitis and posterior graft failure. Patients whose transplant was for a herpetic cause, require close monitoring and prompt identification of any visual or graft changes to start appropriate treatment.

This abstract was presented at the 2022 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Denver, CO, May 1-4, 2022, and virtually.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×