This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Mark H. Haimann, MD; Harold Weiss, MD; Joel A. Miller, MD
Southfield, Mich

Arch Ophthalmol. 1991;109(8):1060-1061.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—We wish to comment on the recent editorial by Doft¹ concerning the Endophthalmitis Vitrectomy Study (EVS).

We are concerned that the choice of initial intravenous antibiotics (ie, ceftazidime and amikacin) may not be the optimal choice for the systemic treatment of endophthalmitis. It is well recognized by retinal specialists that coagulase-negative staphylococci are a common cause of endophthalmitis, particularly following cataract surgery. In our community, there has been an increasing incidence of resistant coagulase-negative staphylococci. Vancomycin has proved to be most efficacious in the treatment of these organisms and is uniformly advised for intraocular injections in the treatment of acute endophthalmitis. We also believe that vancomycin should be used systemically since many of the coagulase-negative staphylococci isolated in our community have been resistant to the cephalosporins and aminoglycosides.

We currently use intravenous vancomycin along with one of the third-generation cephalosporins (usually cefotaxime or ceftazidime) for systemic . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?