Comparison of culture, confocal microscopy and PCR in routine hospital use for microbial keratitis diagnosis.

AIMS: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of polymerase chain reaction (PCR), in vivo confocal microscopy (IVCM) and culture for microbial keratitis (MK) diagnosis. METHODS: Retrospective review of PCR, IVCM and culture results for MK diagnosis at Moorfields Eye Hospital between August 2013 and December 2014. RESULTS: PCR results were available for 259 MK patients with concurrent culture for 203/259 and IVCM for 149/259. Sensitivities and specificities with 95% confidence intervals [95% CI] were calculated for Acanthamoeba keratitis (AK) and fungal keratitis (FK), by comparison with culture, for both IVCM and PCR. For AK, FK and bacterial keratitis (BK) sensitivities were calculated, for each diagnostic method, by comparison with a composite reference standard (a positive result for one or more of culture, PCR or IVCM having a specificity of 100% by definition). For the latter, sensitivities with [95% CI] were: for AK, IVCM 77.1% [62.7-88.0%], PCR 63.3% [48.3-76.6%], culture 35.6 [21.9-51.2]; for FK, IVCM 81.8% [48.2-97.7%], PCR 30.8% [9.09-61.4%], culture 41.7% [15.2-72.3%]; for BK, PCR 25.0% [14.7-37.9%], culture 95.6% [87.6-99.1%]. CONCLUSION: IVCM was the most sensitive technique for AK and FK diagnosis but culture remains our gold standard for BK. These findings reflect results to be expected from service providers to UK ophthalmology units and demonstrates the need at our centre for ongoing diagnostic result audit leading to the potential to improve PCR diagnosis. Both FK and AK are now common in the UK; ophthalmology units need to have all these techniques available to optimise their MK management.

Herpes simplex virus and varicella zoster virus: recent advances in therapy.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The mainstay of antiviral therapy for the alpha-herpesviruses [herpes simplex virus (HSV)-1, HSV-2, and varicella zoster virus (VZV)] over the past 40 years has been the nucleoside analogues such as aciclovir. Although conventional antiviral therapy has reduced mortality in severe disease, novel agents are needed to address the emergence of resistance and toxicity associated with current second-line therapy. Treatment and prophylaxis of VZV and HSV reactivations remains a challenge. RECENT FINDINGS: A number of compounds have recently been evaluated in human clinical trials, amongst them brincidofovir, an intracellularly acting derivative of cidofovir currently undergoing phase III trials. The helicase-primase inhibitors are a new class of antiviral agent and may circumvent resistance to existing agents. Amenamevir and pritelivir are two examples of these agents that have been evaluated clinically along with novel nucleoside analogues such as valomaciclovir and FV-100. Tenofovir, an agent used in HIV and hepatitis B therapy, may also have a role in the prevention of HSV-2 acquisition and reduce viral shedding. SUMMARY: Although several novel antiviral agents have undergone clinical trials in recent years, all are yet to gain licensure. Brincidofovir appears to be the candidate with most promise for adoption into routine practice in the near future.