Endogenous fungal endophthalmitis following COVID-19 infection with microbiological and molecular biological correlation - A report of two cases.

This case report describes three eyes of two patients, who were diagnosed to have endogenous fungal endophthalmitis post coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Both patients underwent vitrectomy with intravitreal anti-fungal injection. Intra-ocular samples confirmed the fungal etiology by conventional microbiological investigations and polymerase chain reaction in both cases. The patients were treated with multiple intravitreal and oral anti-fungal agents; however, vision could not be salvaged.

Endogenous Fungal Endophthalmitis following COVID-19 Hospitalization: Evidence from a Year-Long Observational Study.

PURPOSE: To describe cases of endogenous fungal endophthalmitis (EFE) post-recovery from or hospitalization for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: This prospective audit involved patients with suspected endophthalmitis referred to a tertiary eye care center over a one-year period. Comprehensive ocular examinations, laboratory studies, and imaging were performed. Confirmed cases of EFE with a recent history of COVID-19 hospitalization±intensive care unit admission were identified, documented, managed, followed up, and described. RESULTS: Seven eyes of six patients were reported; 5/6 were male, and the mean age was 55. The mean duration of hospitalization for COVID-19 was approximately 28 days (14-45); the mean time from discharge to onset of visual symptoms was 22 days (0-35). All patients had underlying conditions (5/6 hypertension; 3/6 diabetes mellitus; 2/6 asthma) and had received dexamethasone and remdesivir during their COVID-related hospitalization. All presented with decreased vision, and 4/6 complained of floaters. Baseline visual acuity ranged from light perception (LP) to counting fingers (CF). The fundus was not visible in 3 out of 7 eyes; the other 4 had "creamy-white fluffy lesions" at the posterior pole as well as significant vitritis. Vitreous taps were positive for Candida species in six and Aspergillus species in one eye. Anti-fungal treatment included intravenous amphotericin B followed by oral voriconazole and intravitreal amphotericin B. Three eyes underwent vitrectomy; the systemic health of two patients precluded surgery. One patient (with aspergillosis) died; the others were followed for 7-10 months - the final visual outcome improved from CF to 20/200-20/50 in 4 eyes and worsened (hand motion to LP) or did not change (LP), in two others. CONCLUSION: Ophthalmologists should maintain a high index of clinical suspicion for EFE in cases with visual symptoms and a history of recent COVID-19 hospitalization and/or systemic corticosteroid use - even without other well-known risk factors.

Unique presentations of aspergillosis endogenous endophthalmitis in two hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19.

We present two ICU-hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) presenting with endogenous endophthalmitis in one eye and variable manifestations of chorioretinitis in the fellow eye. Two diabetic patients (57 and 62 years old) showed anterior uveitis and yellowish-white subretinal infiltrations. The fellow eye of one patient showed patches of choroiditis, while the other showed full retinal thickness infiltrations. A workup yielded high serum titers of galactomannan, diagnostic of aspergillosis. The widespread use of high doses of corticosteroids in the management of COVID-19 may predispose to various secondary fungal opportunistic infections and may manifest in different forms of chorioretinal infiltration.

Post-intravitreal injection endophthalmitis pattern during the COVID-19 pandemic with implementation of patients' masking.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the role of patient facial masks on the occurrence of post-intravitreal injection (IVI) endophthalmitis in a real-word setting. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort, patients receiving IVIs between 20 February 2019 and 20 February 2021; a 12-month period before the official beginning of COVID-19 epidemic in Iran and a 12-month period thereafter were included. In the pre-COVID era, patients underwent IVI without a facial mask while in the COVID era patients wore an untaped facial mask. Physicians and staff had facial mask in both periods. IVIs were administered in a dedicated operating room without a strict no talk-policy. The main outcome measure was the rate of post-IVI endophthalmitis. RESULTS: A total number of 53,927 injections was performed during the study period: 34,277 in pre-COVID and 19,650 in COVID periods; with a 42.7% decrease in the number of injections. Endophthalmitis occurred in 7 eyes (0.020%) in pre-COVID and 7 eyes (0.036%) in COVID era (p = 0.40). In multivariate analysis, after adjustment for intercorrelations between the eyes and multiple injections in one patient, there was no statistically significant association between wearing facial masks by the patients and risk of endophthalmitis (relative risk = 1.47, 95% confidence interval of 0.97-2.22; p = 0.071). CONCLUSION: Patients' facial masking is not associated with an increased risk of post-injection endophthalmitis.

Cryptococcus laurentii endogenous endophthalmitis post COVID-19 infection.

A man in mid-50s presented with progressive blurred vision in his left eye for over 6 weeks. He was a known diabetic with history of COVID-19 pneumonia treated with steroids and remdesivir. He had pyelonephritis and urinary culture grown Klebsiella He was referred as a case of non-resolving vitreous haemorrhage. Visual acuity (VA) was hand movements with fundus showing dense vitritis. He underwent pars plana vitrectomy, vitreous biopsy with intraocular antibiotics (imipenem) suspecting as a case of endogenous bacterial endophthalmitis. Vitreous biopsy did not yield organisms on the smear/culture. The patient's condition worsened with perception of light and fundus showing dense vitritis with discrete yellowish white deposits on the surface of the retina. A repeat vitreous biopsy done along with intravitreal injection of voriconazole (suspecting fungal aetiology) grown fungal colonies and the organism was identified as Cryptococcus laurentii At 4-month follow-up, the VA improved to 6/24.

Fulminant fungal endogenous endophthalmitis following SARS-CoV-2 infection: A case report.

Systemic corticosteroids and immunocompromised state following SARS-CoV-2 infection can predispose individuals to endogenous endophthalmitis. A 66-year-old gentleman presented with complaints of diminution of vision and redness one week post discharge after hospitalization for COVID-19 infection. Clinical examination suggested fulminant endogenous endophthalmitis which responded poorly even after aggressive treatment requiring evisceration. Culture and gene sequenced analysis confirmed Aspergillus fumigatus to be the causative organism. A high degree of suspicion is warranted in the presence of recent onset of floaters in COVID-19-infected individuals to facilitate early diagnosis and outcomes.

Endogenous Fungal Endophthalmitis in a Patient Admitted to Intensive Care and Treated with Systemic Steroid for COVID-19

A 61-year-old woman presented to our clinic with complaints of decreased visual acuity, pain, and redness in her left eye. Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was 20/20 in the right eye and counting fingers at 3 meters in the left eye. On slit-lamp examination, 1+ cells were detected in the anterior chamber. Fundus examination revealed 1+ haze in the vitreous and multiple creamy-whitish lesions in the retina and vitreous. Her history included a diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) one month earlier, for which she was hospitalized in the intensive care unit for 20 days and received systemic corticosteroid treatment. Vitreous culture yielded Candida albicans. The patient's nasopharyngeal swab sample was positive for COVID-19 by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction test. BCVA was improved to 20/40 after amphotericin therapy (via intravitreal injection and intravenous routes), and the vitritis and chorioretinitis lesion regressed after 2 weeks of treatment. Two weeks later, intravenous amphotericin was discontinued and oral fluconazole treatment was started at a dose of 400 mg/day. At 3-month follow-up, her BCVA was 20/25 and no inflammatory reaction was observed in the anterior chamber and vitreous.

Sight-threatening intraocular infection in patients with COVID-19 in India.

PURPOSE: Intraocular infection in patients with COVID-19 could be different in the presence of treatment with systemic corticosteroid and immunosuppressive agents. We describe the epidemiology and microbiological profile of intraocular infection in COVID-19 patients after their release from the hospital. METHODS: We analyzed the clinical and microbiological data of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients from April 2020 to January 2021 presenting with features of endogenous endophthalmitis within 12 weeks of their discharge from the hospital in two neighboring states in South India. The data included demography, systemic comorbidities, COVID-19 treatment details, time interval to visual symptoms, the microbiology of systemic and ocular findings, ophthalmic management, and outcomes. RESULTS: The mean age of 24 patients (33 eyes) was 53.6 ± 13.5 (range: 5-72) years; 17 (70.83%) patients were male. Twenty-two (91.6%) patients had systemic comorbidities, and the median period of hospitalization for COVID-19 treatment was 14.5 ± 0.7 (range: 7-63) days. Infection was bilateral in nine patients. COVID-19 treatment included broad-spectrum systemic antibiotics (all), antiviral drugs (22, 91.66% of patients), systemic corticosteroid (21, 87.5% of patients), supplemental oxygen (18, 75% of patients), low molecular weight heparin (17, 70.8% of patients), admission in intensive care units (16, 66.6% of patients), and interleukin-6 inhibitor (tocilizumab) (14, 58.3% of patients). Five (20.8%) patients died of COVID-19-related complications during treatment for endophthalmitis; one eye progressed to pan ophthalmitis and orbital cellulitis; eight eyes regained vision >20/400. Fourteen of 19 (73.7%) vitreous biopsies were microbiologically positive (culture, PCR, and microscopy), and the majority (11 patients, 78.5%) were fungi. CONCLUSION: Intraocular infection in COVID-19 patients is predominantly caused by fungi. We suggest a routine eye examination be included as a standard of care of COVID-19.

The Influence of Universal Face Mask Use on Endophthalmitis Risk after Intravitreal Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Injections.

PURPOSE: Routine use of face masks for patients and physicians during intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections has increased with the emergence of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. This study evaluates the impact of universal face mask use on rates and outcomes of post-injection endophthalmitis (PIE). DESIGN: Retrospective, multicenter, comparative cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Eyes receiving intravitreal anti-VEGF injections from October 1, 2019, to July 31, 2020, at 12 centers. METHODS: Cases were divided into a "no face mask" group if no face masks were worn by the physician or patient during intravitreal injections or a "universal face mask" group if face masks were worn by the physician, ancillary staff, and patient during intravitreal injections. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rate of endophthalmitis, microbial spectrum, and visual acuity (VA). RESULTS: Of 505 968 intravitreal injections administered in 110 547 eyes, 85 of 294 514 (0.0289%; 1 in 3464 injections) cases of presumed endophthalmitis occurred in the "no face mask" group, and 45 of 211 454 (0.0213%; 1 in 4699) cases occurred in the "universal face mask" group (odds ratio [OR], 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51-1.18; P = 0.097). In the "no face mask" group, there were 27 cases (0.0092%; 1 in 10 908 injections) of culture-positive endophthalmitis compared with 9 cases (0.004%; 1 in 23 494) in the "universal face mask" group (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.22-0.99; P = 0.041). Three cases of oral flora-associated endophthalmitis occurred in the "no face mask" group (0.001%; 1 in 98 171 injections) compared with 1 (0.0005%; 1 in 211 454) in the "universal face mask" group (P = 0.645). Patients presented a mean (range) 4.9 (1-30) days after the causative injection, and mean logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) VA at endophthalmitis presentation was 2.04 (~20/2200) for "no face mask" group compared with 1.65 (~20/900) for the "universal face mask" group (P = 0.022), although no difference was observed 3 months after treatment (P = 0.764). CONCLUSIONS: In a large, multicenter, retrospective study, physician and patient face mask use during intravitreal anti-VEGF injections did not alter the risk of presumed acute-onset bacterial endophthalmitis, but there was a reduced rate of culture-positive endophthalmitis. Three months after presentation, there was no difference in VA between the groups.

Unveiling endophthalmitis post COVID-19 - A case series.

Since December 2019, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by SARS-CoV-2, has become a global pandemic. There has been a resurgence in complications involving various organs in patients recovered from COVID-19, and endophthalmitis is one of them. Endophthalmitis-an inflammation of intraocular tissues leading to loss of vision or even loss of eye-has been a rare occurrence in the past, but has been on the rise in the post-COVID-19 times. Here we report seven such cases.

Comparison of post-cataract surgery endophthalmitis rates using syringing or regurgitation on pressure over the lacrimal sac as a preoperative screening tool for nasolacrimal duct obstruction: An impact assessment of protocol alteration due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Purpose: To compare the post-cataract endophthalmitis (PCE) rates among eyes undergoing syringing or regurgitation on pressure over the lacrimal sac (ROPLAS) test prior to cataract surgery. Methods: We performed a single-center, retrospective, comparative analysis of eyes developing PCE who underwent syringing prior to cataract surgery (group A) in the pre-COVID-19 era between November 1 2019 and January 31, 2020 and the eyes that underwent ROPLAS test prior to cataract surgery (group B) in the COVID-19 era between November 1, 2020 and January 31, 2021. Results: A total of 87,144 eyes underwent cataract surgery during the two time periods of the study. Syringing was performed in 48,071 eyes, whereas ROPLAS was performed in 39,073 eyes. In group A, 19 eyes (0.039%) developed PCE, whereas 20 eyes (0.051%) developed PCE in group B (P = 0.517). Between the two groups, the grade of anterior chamber cellular reaction (P = 0.675), hypopyon (P = 0.738), and vitreous haze (P = 0.664) were comparable. Gram-positive organisms were detected in 4 eyes in group A and 6 eyes in group B; 2 eyes in group A had gram-negative bacilli. The presenting visual acuity (Group A: LogMAR 1.42 and Group B: LogMAR 1.30) and final visual acuity (Group A: LogMAR 0.52 and Group B: LogMAR 0.5) were comparable between the two groups. (P = 0.544 and 0.384, respectively). Conclusion: The rates of PCE were comparable among the eyes undergoing either syringing test or ROPLAS prior to cataract surgery.

Aerosol generation through pars plana vitrectomy.

PURPOSE: To assess whether pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) is an aerosol-generating procedure (AGP) in an ex vivo experimental model. METHODS: In this ex vivo study on 10 porcine eyes, optical particle counter was used to measure particles ≤10 µm using cumulative mode in the six in-built channels: 0.3 µm, 0.5 µm, 1 µm, 2.5 µm, 5 µm and 10 µm aerosols during PPV. Two parts of the study were as follows: (1) to assess the pre-experimental baseline aerosol count in the theatre environment where there are dynamic changes in temperature and humidity and (2) to measure aerosol generation with 23-gauge and 25-gauge set-up. For each porcine eye, five measurements were taken for each consecutive step in the experiment including pre-PPV, during PPV, fluid-air exchange (FAX) and venting using a flute with 23-gauge set-up and a chimney with 25-gauge set-up. Therefore, a total of 200 measurements were recorded. RESULTS: With 23-gauge and 25-gauge PPV, there was no significant difference in aerosol generation in all six channels comparing pre-PPV versus PPV or pre-PPV versus FAX. Venting using flute with 23-gauge PPV showed significant reduction of aerosol ≤1 µm. Air venting using chimney with 25-gauge set-up showed no significant difference in aerosol of ≤1 µm. For cumulative aerosol counts of all particles measuring ≤5 µm, compared with pre-PPV, PPV or FAX, flute venting in 23-gauge set-up showed significant reduction unlike the same comparison for chimney venting in 25-gauge set-up. CONCLUSION: PPV and its associate steps do not generate aerosols ≤10 µm with 23-gauge and 25-gauge set-ups.

Endogenous Endophthalmitis A Complication of COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case Series.

PURPOSE: To report six patients with endogenous endophthalmitis as a complication of COVID-19 infection. METHODS: A multicentric retrospective database review of patients with a diagnosis of endogenous endophthalmitis and a history of COVID-19 infection. RESULTS: Four of six patients were diabetics. All presented after an average duration of 40 days (Range 17-90 days) of COVID-19 infection. Two of six patients had bilateral involvement. Five of six patients had received intravenous corticosteroid for COVID-19. Two of six vitreous samples showed fungi (Candida and Bipolaris species), two showed bacteria (Staphylococcus species) and two samples were culture negative. Control of infection with good visual outcome in four out of eight eyes. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 patients with a history of hospitalization and prolonged use of systemic corticosteroids and comorbidities, for example, diabetes mellitus have a high risk of endogenous endophthalmitis. A high index of clinical suspicion with timely intervention can salvage many eyes.

Endophthalmitis Rate in Immediately Sequential versus Delayed Sequential Bilateral Cataract Surgery within the Intelligent Research in Sight (IRIS®) Registry Data.

PURPOSE: To compare the rate of postoperative endophthalmitis after immediately sequential bilateral cataract surgery (ISBCS) versus delayed sequential bilateral cataract surgery (DSBCS) using the American Academy of Ophthalmology Intelligent Research in Sight (IRIS®) Registry database. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Patients in the IRIS Registry who underwent cataract surgery from 2013 through 2018. METHODS: Patients who underwent cataract surgery were divided into 2 groups: (1) ISBCS and (2) DSBCS (second-eye surgery ≥1 day after the first-eye surgery) or unilateral surgery. Postoperative endophthalmitis was defined as endophthalmitis occurring within 4 weeks of surgery by International Classification of Diseases (ICD) code and ICD code with additional clinical criteria. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rate of postoperative endophthalmitis. RESULTS: Of 5 573 639 IRIS Registry patients who underwent cataract extraction, 165 609 underwent ISBCS, and 5 408 030 underwent DSBCS or unilateral surgery (3 695 440 DSBCS, 1 712 590 unilateral surgery only). A total of 3102 participants (0.056%) met study criteria of postoperative endophthalmitis with supporting clinical findings. The rates of endophthalmitis in either surgery eye between the 2 surgery groups were similar (0.059% in the ISBCS group vs. 0.056% in the DSBCS or unilateral group; P = 0.53). Although the incidence of endophthalmitis was slightly higher in the ISBCS group compared with the DSBCS or unilateral group, the odds ratio did not reach statistical significance (1.08; 95% confidence interval, 0.87-1.31; P = 0.47) after adjusting for age, sex, race, insurance status, and comorbid eye disease. Seven cases of bilateral endophthalmitis with supporting clinical data in the DSBCS group and no cases in the ISBCS group were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Risk of postoperative endophthalmitis was not statistically significantly different between patients who underwent ISBCS and DSBCS or unilateral cataract surgery.