rss
Br J Ophthalmol 2008;92:1201-1205 doi:10.1136/bjo.2008.138065
  • Original Article
    • Clinical science

Comparison of oral antiviral therapy with valacyclovir or acyclovir after penetrating keratoplasty for herpetic keratitis

  1. D Goldblum1,2,
  2. C Bachmann1,
  3. C Tappeiner1,
  4. J Garweg3,
  5. B E Frueh1
  1. 1
    Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital, Inselspital, Bern, Switzerland
  2. 2
    Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
  3. 3
    Swiss Eye Institute, Lindenhofspital, Bern, Switzerland
  1. Dr D Goldblum, Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, CH-4031 Basel, Switzerland; dgoldblum{at}uhbs.ch
  • Accepted 6 June 2008
  • Published Online First 23 July 2008

Abstract

Aims: To compare the outcome of prophylactic oral valacyclovir (VAL) or oral acyclovir treatment (ACV) in patients having undergone penetrating keratoplasty for herpetic keratitis (HK).

Methods: All patients having received a penetrating keratoplasty for HK and being treated postoperatively with either oral VAL or oral ACV (inclusion period from 12/97 to 3/06 and 5/92 to 9/96, respectively) were retrospectively evaluated. Records were analysed for postoperative reactivation of recurrent HK, graft rejection, endothelial cell loss, central corneal thickness and visual acuity after a follow-up of up to 5 years.

Results: Twenty patients received VAL and were compared with 19 patients being treated with ACV. Two patients developed clinical signs of recurrent herpetic disease in the VAL group compared with three patients in the ACV group. Two patients from both groups each developed an irreversible graft failure. Best corrected visual acuity improved in both treatment groups from baseline (logMAR) −1.97 (VAL), −1.47 (ACV) to −0.85, −0.72, respectively, at the 1-year follow-up and slightly deteriorated after 5 years in the ACV group (−0.71 VAL vs −1.14 ACV).

Conclusion: Prophylactic oral VAL treatment is at least as effective as ACV in preventing recurrence in patients who underwent corneal transplantation for HK. The tolerability of the two drugs is similar, but the dosing for VAL might be more comfortable for patients.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: None.

  • Ethics approval: Retrospective analysis of the data was approved by the cantonal ethical committee of the University of Bern.

This Article

  1. Abstract
  2. Full text
  3. PDF
  4. All versions of this article:
    1. bjo.2008.138065v1
    2. 92/9/1201 most recent

Responses

  1. Submit a response
  2. No responses published

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.