4.7 Article

Acyclovir Prophylaxis Predisposes to Antiviral-Resistant Recurrent Herpetic Keratitis

Journal

JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 208, Issue 9, Pages 1359-1365

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jit350

Keywords

recurrent keratitis; retrospective study; patients; acyclovir prophylaxis; acyclovir resistance; refractory disease; risk factors

Funding

  1. Stichting Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek Oogziekenhuis Rotterdam

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose. Long-term acyclovir (ACV) prophylaxis, recommended to prevent recurrent herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1) ocular disorders, may pose a risk for ACV-refractory disease due to ACV resistance. We determined the effect of ACV prophylaxis on the prevalence of corneal ACV-resistant (ACV(R)) HSV-1 and clinical consequences thereof in patients with recurrent HSV-1 keratitis (rHK). Methods. Frequencies of ACV(R) viruses were determined in 169 corneal HSV-1 isolates from 78 rHK patients with a history of stromal disease. The isolates' ACV susceptibility profiles were correlated with clinical parameters to identify risk factors predisposing to ACV(R) rHK. Results. Corneal HSV-1 isolates with >28% ACV(R) viruses were defined as ACV(R) isolates. Forty-four isolates (26%) were ACV-resistant. Multivariate analyses identified long-term ACV prophylaxis (>= 12 months) (odds ratio [OR] 3.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.32-8.87) and recurrence duration of >= 45 days (OR 2.23; 95% CI, 1.02-4.87), indicative of ACV-refractory disease, as independent risk factors for ACV(R) isolates. Moreover, a corneal ACV(R) isolate was a risk factor for ACV-refractory disease (OR 2.28; 95% CI, 1.06-4.89). Conclusions. The data suggest that long-term ACV prophylaxis predisposes to ACV-refractory disease due to the emergence of corneal ACV(R) HSV-1. ACV-susceptibility testing is warranted during follow-up of rHK patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available