Barza M, Pavan P R, Doft B H, Wisniewski S R, Wilson L A, Han D P, Kelsey S F
Tupper Research Institute, Department of Medicine, New England Medical Center, Boston, Mass, USA.
Arch Ophthalmol. 1997 Sep;115(9):1142-50. doi: 10.1001/archopht.1997.01100160312008.
To analyze the data for cultures and Gram stains prospectively collected by protocol in the Endophthalmitis Vitrectomy Study.
Cultures of aqueous, undiluted vitreous, and (for patients who underwent vitrectomy) vitrectomy cassette fluid obtained from 420 patients were prepared on chocolate agar, in thioglycolate broth, and on Sabouraud dextrose agar; Gram stains of the aqueous and undiluted vitreous were made. Criteria were devised to distinguish true pathogens (confirmed positive cultures) from contaminants.
Private and university-based retina-vitreous practices and corresponding microbiology laboratories.
Compared with the aqueous, undiluted vitreous produced a higher percentage of confirmed positive cultures and higher colony counts on chocolate agar and was more frequently the only source of a positive culture from the eye. Nevertheless, the aqueous and vitrectomy cassette fluid were the only source of a positive culture from the eye in 4.2% and 8.9% of eyes, respectively. The overall yields of chocolate agar and thioglycolate broth were similar. A positive Gram stain from the aqueous or undiluted vitreous was highly predictive of a positive culture from the eye, but a negative Gram stain had little predictive value for the culture result. The overall rate of laboratory-confirmed infection was not statistically significantly higher in the vitrectomy group than in the tap or biopsy group.
The vitreous was a richer source of positive cultures and high colony counts than was the aqueous, either because it is more supportive of bacterial growth or because a somewhat larger inoculum of the vitreous than of aqueous could be obtained. The result of Gram stain should not determine the choice of antibiotic drugs in the treatment of endophthalmitis. Vitrectomy, with culture of the vitrectomy cassette fluid, did not produce significantly more positive cultures than tap or biopsy material, and the procedure should not be performed to improve the microbiological yield.
分析眼内炎玻璃体切割术研究中按照方案前瞻性收集的培养和革兰氏染色数据。
从420例患者获取的房水、未稀释玻璃体以及(接受玻璃体切割术的患者)玻璃体切割器液体的培养物,分别在巧克力琼脂、硫乙醇酸盐肉汤和沙氏葡萄糖琼脂上制备;对房水和未稀释玻璃体进行革兰氏染色。制定标准以区分真正的病原体(培养结果确诊为阳性)和污染物。
私立和大学附属的视网膜玻璃体诊疗机构及相应的微生物实验室。
与房水相比,未稀释玻璃体产生的确诊阳性培养物百分比更高,在巧克力琼脂上的菌落计数更高,并且更常是眼内阳性培养物的唯一来源。然而,房水和玻璃体切割器液体分别是4.2%和8.9%的眼内阳性培养物的唯一来源。巧克力琼脂和硫乙醇酸盐肉汤的总体培养阳性率相似。房水或未稀释玻璃体的革兰氏染色阳性对眼内培养阳性具有高度预测性,但革兰氏染色阴性对培养结果的预测价值不大。玻璃体切割术组经实验室确诊的感染总体发生率在统计学上并不显著高于穿刺或活检组。
玻璃体比房水是更丰富的阳性培养物来源且菌落计数更高,这要么是因为它更有利于细菌生长,要么是因为能获得比房水稍大的玻璃体接种量。革兰氏染色结果不应决定眼内炎治疗中抗生素药物的选择。玻璃体切割术联合玻璃体切割器液体培养,产生的阳性培养物并不比穿刺或活检材料显著更多,不应为提高微生物学阳性率而进行该手术。