title: The microbiological profile of lacrimal abscess: two decades of experience from a tertiary eye care center.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The aim of this study is to exclusively report the microbiological spectrum of lacrimal abscess and the antibiotic sensitivity patterns of the organisms. Retrospective interventional study on 112 eyes of 112 patients who presented to the ophthalmic plastic clinic of a tertiary eye care center over a period of 23 years from January 1990 to February 2013 with lacrimal abscess were reviewed for demographic and microbiological profile. The culture results, organisms isolated, and their antibiotic sensitivity were studied.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The mean age at presentation was 37 years. The female to male ratio was 2:1. There was no significant difference in the laterality between the right and left eyes. Gram-positive organisms were the most commonly isolated accounting for 56.3% (63/112), and the commonest species isolated was Staphylococcus aureus in 25% (28/112) of the patients. Hemophilus influenzae was the commonest gram-negative isolate accounting for 30.2% of all the gram-negative isolates. Of the patients, 10.7% (12/112) showed no organisms on smear as well as sterile cultures. Gram-positive organisms were commonly sensitive to penicillins and vancomycin whereas gram-negative organisms were sensitive to quinolones and aminoglycosides.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Gram-positive organisms are quite common as compared to gram-negative ones in cases of lacrimal abscess. The results of this study have significant bearing on the treatment of patients with lacrimal abscess.
authors.affiliation: Dacryology Service, Ophthalmic Plastics Surgery, L,V, Prasad Eye Institute, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad 500034, India. drjaved007@gmail.com.
authors.forename: Mohammad Javed
authors.initials: MJ
authors.lastname: Ali
authors.forename: Swapna R
authors.initials: SR
authors.lastname: Motukupally
authors.forename: Surbhi D
authors.initials: SD
authors.lastname: Joshi
authors.forename: Milind N
authors.initials: MN
authors.lastname: Naik
references.citation: Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007 Jul-Aug;23(4):302-6
references.pmid: 17667103
references.citation: Orbit. 2009;28(2-3):196-9
references.pmid: 19839913
references.citation: Orbit. 2005 Jun;24(2):95-8
references.pmid: 16191795
references.citation: Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005 Sep;21(5):387-9
references.pmid: 16234708
references.citation: Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 1993 Jun;9(2):125-31
references.pmid: 8323904
references.citation: Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 1993;9(1):38-41; discussion 42
references.pmid: 8443113
references.citation: Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005 Sep;21(5):371-5
references.pmid: 16234703
references.citation: Br J Ophthalmol. 1997 Jan;81(1):37-40
references.pmid: 9135406
references.citation: Arch Ophthalmol. 2002 Aug;120(8):1096-9
references.pmid: 12149070
references.citation: Ethiop Med J. 2010 Jan;48(1):29-33
references.pmid: 20607995
references.citation: Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2005 May;25(3):261-3
references.pmid: 15854074
references.citation: Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2002 Mar-Apr;46(2):177-82
references.pmid: 12062223
references.citation: Orbit. 2008;27(4):243-7
references.pmid: 18716961
references.citation: Orbit. 2010 Oct;29(5):286-90
references.pmid: 20712513
references.citation: Am J Ophthalmol. 1998 Apr;125(4):552-4
references.pmid: 9559743
references.citation: Can J Ophthalmol. 1996 Jun;31(4):201-2
references.pmid: 8804761
references.citation: J AAPOS. 2006 Dec;10(6):583-4
references.pmid: 17189157
references.citation: Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 1996 Dec;12(4):294-5
references.pmid: 8944391
references.citation: Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005 May;21(3):207-10
references.pmid: 15942496
references.citation: Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh). 1992 Dec;70(6):745-9
references.pmid: 1488881