 |
 |

The Case Against the Use of Steroids in the Treatment of Bacterial Keratitis
Elisabeth J. Cohen, MD
Arch Ophthalmol. 2009;127(1):103-104.
 |
 |
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
 |
 |
For 50 years, the debate for and against the use of topical steroids in the treatment of bacterial keratitis has raged. Today it is as controversial as ever. Kirk Wilhelmus, MD, has advanced the subject and helped me with this article by doing an excellent literature review of the subject in his article "Indecision About Corticosteroids for Bacterial Keratitis: An Evidence-Based Update."1 I still agree with the quotation he cites by Thygeson, published originally in 1953, that "great care should be examined in the use of cortisone and hydrocortisone in central corneal ulcers and that bacteriologic diagnosis should be made before employment of these hormones."1(p839) Evidence and experience suggest that even after the results of cultures and sensitivities are known, one should be especially cautious in the use of topical steroids in the treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. I think the anti-inflammatory effects of antibiotics (a . . . [Full Text of this Article] AUTHOR INFORMATION
Author Affiliation: Department of Ophthalmology, Jefferson Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Cornea Service, Wills Eye Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
CiteULike Connotea Delicious Digg Facebook Reddit Technorati Twitter
What's this?
RELATED LETTER
The Steroid Controversy in Bacterial Keratitis
Nisha R. Acharya, Muthiah Srinivasan, Jeena Mascarenhas, Meenakshi Ravindran, Revathi Rajaraman, Michael Zegans, Stephen McLeod, and Thomas M. Lietman
Arch Ophthalmol. 2009;127(9):1231.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
Pseudomonas aeruginosa Keratitis: Outcomes and Response to Corticosteroid Treatment
Sy et al.
IOVS 2012;53:267-272.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Steroid Controversy in Bacterial Keratitis
Acharya et al.
Arch Ophthalmol 2009;127:1231-1231.
FULL TEXT
|