A toxic ocular manifestation of chloramphenicol therapy; report of a case of optic neuritis.
A toxic ocular manifestation of chloramphenicol therapy; report of a case of optic neuritis.
复制标题
氯霉素治疗的毒性眼部表现;
DOI:
10.1016/0002-9394(57)91949-9
复制
发表时间:
1957
期刊:
影响因子:
--
通讯作者:
L. Janoff
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
J. Cole;H. G. Cole;L. Janoff
DISCUSSIONThe good name of a potent and useful drug is rapidly being tarnished by reports, such as this one, about its serious side effects. There is no question that chloram phenicol saves many lives. Rickettsial dis eases, meningitis, bacterial endocarditis, and serious infections resistant to other antibio tics have responded to chloramphenicol. The severity of the side effects, therefore, does not justify condemnation of the drug. As with any drug, all possible side effects should be understood and anticipated so that treatment may be discontinued before irreversible damage is done. The most frequently reported manifesta tions of chloramphenicol toxicity are aplas tic anemias, anaphylactic reactions, skin eruptions, and mucous membrane irritations. Psychologic manifestations and paresthesias have also been noted. Optic neuritis, though apparently a rare result of toxicity, deserves a prominent place on the list of known toxic manifestations of chloramphenicol not only because of its serious nature but because of the implications. Since it is obvious that optic-nerve damage is a side effect of chlor amphenicol, it might be useful to consider whether the psychologic effects noted may not be caused by similar damage to other structures of the central nervous system. The concentration of chloramphenicol in the cerebrospinal fluid is high, almost half that in the blood. Such a high concentration does not occur with other antibiotics of the tetra cycline class.In long-term treatment with any antibiotic or combination of antibiotics, frequent ex amination of the blood is standard practice. To this should be added frequent examina tion of the fundus. It is well to remember that the fundus is a useful diagnostic area. The possibility should be considered that the fundus may reveal the first signs of toxicity. Routine check throughout the course of chloramphenicol treatment in a number of cases should reveal whether this would be of value. At any rate, examination of the eyes by an ophthalmologist is mandatory if any other symptoms of toxicity, such as skin eruptions, appear. On the basis of the two cases reported, and our case, the ocular symptoms of chlor amphenicol toxicity are blurred vision, peri central scotoma, and constriction of the visual field. Ophthalmoscopic examination in the case reported here revealed edema of the optic nerve and dilation of the veins. Lasky, Pincus, and ICatlan^ reported the same findings and, in addition, numerous hemorrhages in various parts of the fundus. Wallenstein and Snyder* found hyperemia of the optic nerve and disc margins obscured by edema of the nerve fibers. Vitamin B12 appears to have corrected various conditions brought on by chloram phenicol toxicity. In our case, the optic neuritis was decreased after withdrawal of chloramphenicol and administration of Dia mox, Vitamin B12, and thiamine chloride. In the case reported by Lasky, Pincus, and Katlan, the condition was more advanced; while anemia and skin eruptions were cor-