• Users Online: 51207
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page

   Table of Contents      
ARTICLES
Year : 1978  |  Volume : 26  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 9-11

Treatment of keratomycosis with amphotericin B. ointment


Medical College, Amritsar-Punjab, India

Correspondence Address:
M R Chaddah
Department of Ophthalmology, Medical College, Amritsar-Punjab
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


PMID: 711284

Rights and PermissionsRights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Chaddah M R, Aggarwal D C. Treatment of keratomycosis with amphotericin B. ointment. Indian J Ophthalmol 1978;26:9-11

How to cite this URL:
Chaddah M R, Aggarwal D C. Treatment of keratomycosis with amphotericin B. ointment. Indian J Ophthalmol [serial online] 1978 [cited 2024 Mar 19];26:9-11. Available from: https://journals.lww.com/ijo/pages/default.aspx/text.asp?1978/26/1/9/31447

Mycotic corneal ulcers are becoming more frequent due to increasing use of broad spectrum antibiotics and corticosteroids. In the literature there are a number of reports regarding the efficacy of topical use of various antimycotic agents. Kaufman and Wood[1] found thiomersal (Merthiolate in dil. of 1 : 1000 in normal saline) as disappointing, whereas Jones et al[1] reported that 5% suspension of Pimaricin is effective against Fusarium solani keratitis only.

Amphotericin B is the only anti-fungal anti­biotic which is effective against wide variety of mycotic lesions of cornea.[2] It is an antifungal antibiotic which was isolated in 1955 by Gold et al[7] from a soil strain of streptomyces originating in Venezuela. Jones et al[1] and Wood and Williford[15] have tried amphotericin B in the form of aqueous solutions with encouraging results. However, we have not come across any report from this country regarding use of amphotericin ointment in keratomycosis.


  Material and Methods Top


Cultures were done in twenty cases of corneal ulcers which had the clinical appearance of fungal keratitis. Scrapings from corneal ulcers which pre­sented with characteristics of fungal infection were examined for the presence of hyphae and were also cultured on Sabouraud's agar medium. In addition to usual treatment of corneal ulcer 10% amphotericin ointment was put in the eye twice a day. The response to treatment was noted daily.


  Observations Top


Sixty percent of the patients gave a history of trauma out of whom 60% had agricultural injury. Corneal ulcers were central in 14 patients (70%) whereas in others they were either paracentral or peripheral. Dry yellowish slough was present in 16 cases (80%). Twelve patients (60%) had used both corticosteroids and antibiotics locally where­as one had used steroids only and the remaining did not use any medicine.

Culture reports were as under:

Aspergillus 12%

Aspergillus and Epidermophyton I%

Aspergillus Paecilomyces 1%

Penicillium 1%

Hemispora 1 %

Epidermophyton 1%

Fusarium 1%

No Growth. 2%

The first detectable improvement in ulcer was rounding up of the irregular margins accompanied by decrease in the congestion within 2-3 days. This was accompanied by subjective improvement of symptoms which were followed by re-epithelization. In 14 cases ulcers healed after treatment for 2'2 weeks to 5 weeks, average being 3J weeks. In the remaining 6 cases the drug was ineffective and conjunctival flapping had to be done. In patient in whom the ulcer healed with this treatment the resultant visual acuity was not encouraging. All these patients tolerated the drug and did not have ocular irritation.


  Discussion Top


Forty per cent of our patients were agricultural labourers whereas in cases reported by Balakri­shnan[3], 30% were agricultural labourers History of trauma was available in 60% of the cases where­as in non-fungal ulcers studied in this department the history of trauma was present in 47% of the patients only. Thus traumatizing agents infected in the fields may be an important etiological factor in producing keratomycosis. According to Anderson et al[2] the commonest initial cause of fungal corneal ulcers is trauma due to variety of accidental injuries such as vegetable matter, soil, bush or machine tools.

In the present study the mycological identifi­cation by culture was positive in 90% of the cases as compared to 85.7%[4] and 65.6%[15].

Aspergillus constituted the major causative agent (70%) in our cases. In India the prevalence of Aspergillus has been reported to be 50%[14] and 54%[6]. Aspergillus has been reported to be second commonest invader in South Florida[10], Britain[1] and Nigeria[8] whereas Fusarium is considered to be commonest fungus in South Florida[9] and Nigeria[8].

Amphotericin B has been used by various workers in aqueous form, alone or in combina­tion with other antifungal drugs with varying result. Currie[5] used this drug in dilution of 1 mg per ml in three cases of Keratomycosis, with quick, complete and dramatic results. But in two out of the three cases, there was severe pain for 5 minutes after each instillation. Jones et al[10] used pimaricin in 16 out of 28 cases of Fusarium keratitis and suggested that 5% pimari­cin should be the initial therapy followed by the use of amphotericin B. Polak and Kaufman[13] treated 33 cases of keratomycosis successfully with combined application of 5% pimaricin and amphotericin B in 0.5% aqueous form. Chin et all used amphotericin B in 0.5% aqueous form and pimaricin 5%. According to him pimaricin is effective in candida infection.

In this study amphotericin B ointment in concentration of 10% was used twice daily. The drug was used for a minimum period of 22 weeks to a maximum of 5 weeks for complete cure of the ulcer whereas Anderson et a[2]' used the drug in aqueous form for a minimum period of 4 months to a maximum of 9 months for com­plete cure of ulcer. Kaufman and Wood[12] also made similar observations.

The visual results in our series were not as good as reported by Wood and Williford[15] which could be due to the fact that our patients reported late.

The disadvantage with the use of amphoteri­cin B in aqueous form is that a concentration of 0.3% or more have not been well tolerated and therefore poor response to treatment. Secondly, the intolerance is due to ocular irritation from sodium desoxycholate which is added to make amphotericin B water soluble in concentration of 0.3% or more.[11]

The advantage with amphotericin ointment is that it could be used in a greater strength of 10% without any ocular irritation. The second advantage with amphotericin B ointment is that it adhered to the ulcer surface leading to prolon­ged contact time and did not get diluted with the tears. It was well tolerated and did not produce any ocular irritation which has been reported after the use of aqueous solution.

This study suggests that amphotericin B ointment is quite effective in the treatment of Keratomycosis and should be the initial drug of choice.


  Summary and Conclusion Top


Aspergillus was the most common fungus responsible for mycotic keratitis in our series. Ten per cent amphotericin B ointment was quite effective in the treatment of keratomycosis. The drug was well tolerated and did not produce any ocular irritation.

 
  References Top

1.
Ainley, R., Smith, B., 1965, Brit. J. Ophthal., 49, 505.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Anderson, B., Robert, S., Gonalez, C. and Chick, E., 1959, Arch. Ophthal., 62, 169.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Balakrishnan, E., 1962, XIX International Oph­thalrnological Congress, Ophthalmological Acta. 11, 1242.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Chin, G.N., Hyndink, R.A., Kwasmy, G.P. and Schultz, R.O., 1975, Amer. J. Ophthal., 79, 121.   Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Currie, D., 1963, Arch. Ophthal., 70, 335.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Das Gupta, L.R., Gup:a, A.K., Ray Ghosh, B., Sundararaj, I., Ramamurthy, S. and Lamba, P.A., 1973, Indian J. Med. Res., 61, 165.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Gold, W., Stout, H.A., Pagano, J.F. and Dono­vick, R. 1956, Quoted by Foster, J B.T., Almeda, E., Littman, M.L., Wilson M.E., 1958, AMA. Arch. Ophthal., 60, 555.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Gugnani, H.C., Talwar, R.S., Njokyobi, A.N.U. and Kodilinye, H.C., 1976, Brit. J. O,-:hthal., 60,607.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Jones, B.P., Jones, B.D., Lun, A.S.M., Bron, A.J., Movgen, G. and Clayton, Y.M., 1969, Trans. Ophthal. Soc., U.K. 89,757.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Jones, D.B., Sexton, R.R. and Rebell, G.G., 1969, Trans. Ophthal. Soc., U.K., 89, 781.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Jones, D.B., Foster, R.R. and Rebell, 1972, Arch. Ophthal., 88, 147.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Kaufman, H.E. and Wood R.M., 1965, Amer. J. Ophthal., 59, 993.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Polak, E.M. and Kaufman, H.E., 1971, Arch. Ophthal., 85, 410.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Reddy, P.S., Satyendran, O.M., Satapathy, M.,Kumar, H.V. and Reddy, P.R., 1972, Ind. J.Ophthal., 20, 101.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Wood, T.O. and Williford, W., 1976, Amer. J.Ophthal., 81, 847.  Back to cited text no. 15
    




 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
Material and Methods
Observations
Discussion
Summary and Conc...
References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2527    
    Printed110    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded0    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal