HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Google Scholar Articles by Chiquet, C. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Chiquet, C.

Eubacterial PCR for Bacterial Detection and Identification in 100 Acute Postcataract Surgery Endophthalmitis

¹From the Departments of Ophthalmology and ⁷Microbiology, University Hospital Center (CHU) de Grenoble, Université Joseph Fourier, Grenoble, France; the ²Department of Ophthalmology, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, and ⁴Centre National de Référence des Staphylocoques, Faculté Laennec, Université Lyon 1, Lyon, France; ³INSERM (Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale), U851, Lyon, France; ⁵Laboratoire de Bactériologie, Centre de Biologie et de Pathologie Est, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Bron, France; the ⁶Departments of Ophthalmology and ¹⁰Microbiology, CHU de Saint-Etienne, Saint-Etienne University, Saint-Etienne, France; and the ⁸Departments of Ophthalmology and ⁹Microbiology, CHU de Dijon, Dijon University, Dijon, France.

PURPOSE. To evaluate eubacterial PCR compared with conventional cultures for detection and identification of bacterial agents in ocular samples from patients with acute postcataract endophthalmitis.

METHODS. Broad-range eubacterial PCR amplification was used, followed by direct DNA sequencing in ocular samples (aqueous humor, vitreous samples from tap or vitrectomy) from 100 consecutive patients presenting with acute postcataract endophthalmitis. Bacterial cultures were performed on the same ocular samples by using traditional methods (brain-heart infusion broth).

RESULTS. At the time of admission, the detection rate was not significantly different between cultures and PCR (38.2% for cultures versus 34.6% for PCR in aqueous humor samples; 54% versus 57% in vitreous from a vitreous tap). In contrast, in the vitreous obtained from vitrectomy, after intravitreous injection of antibiotics, PCR detected bacteria in 70% of the cases, compared with 9% in cultures. By combining PCR and cultures, bacterial identification was obtained in 47% of aqueous humor samples at admission, in 68% of vitreous samples from a vitreous tap at admission, and in 72% of vitreous samples from pars plana vitrectomy. Gram-positive bacteria predominated (94.3%). The concordance between cultures and PCR was 100%. The contamination rate was 2%.

CONCLUSIONS. Cultures and eubacterial PCR are complementary techniques for bacterial identification in eyes with acute postcataract endophthalmitis. PCR technique was needed for identification of the involved microbial pathogen in 25% of all the cases. Eubacterial PCR is more effective than cultures in detecting bacteria in vitreous samples from patients with previous intravitreous administration of antibiotics.