Volume 15, Number 5—May 2009
Letter
Postoperative Panophthalmitis Caused by Whipple Disease
Table
Patient. no. | Age, y/sex | Class | Location | Postoperative uveitis | Use of local or systemic steroids | Microscopy, PAS stain | EM | PCR | Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 52/M | I | B | – | No | + | + | ND | (3) |
2 | 60/M | A | B | – | No | + | + | ND | (5) |
3 | 56/M | A | B | + | Yes | + | ND | ND | (4) |
4 | 47/M | A | B | – | Yes | + | ND | ND | (4) |
5 | 65/M | A | B | + | Yes | + | + | + | (6) |
6 | 59/F | A | B | + | Yes | + | + | + | (7)† |
7 | 53/F | Pa | U | – | Yes | + | ND | + | (7)† |
8 | 65/M | I | U | + | Yes | + | ND | + | (7)† |
9 | NR/NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | ND | ND | + | (8) |
10 | 65/M | I | U | + | Yes | ND | ND | +‡ | (7) |
11 | 81/M | P | U | + | Yes | ND | ND | +‡ | (7) |
12 | 35/M | P | U | NR | NR | ND | ND | +‡ | (7) |
13 | 46/M | P | U | – | No | ND | ND | +‡ | (7) |
14 | 3/F | A | U | – | No | ND | ND | +‡ | (7) |
15 | 90/F | A | U | + | Yes | ND | ND | +‡ | (7) |
16 | 69/M | P | U | + | Yes | ND | ND | +‡ | (7) |
17 | 20/F | A | U | + | Yes | ND | ND | +‡ | (7) |
18 | 74/F | Pa | U | + | Yes | ND | ND | +‡ | (7) |
19 | 78/F | P | U | + | Yes | ND | ND | +‡ | (7) |
*PAS, periodic acid–Schiff; EM, electron microscopy; I, intermediate; B, bilateral; ND, not done; A, anterior; Pa, panuveitis; U, unilateral; NR, not reported; P, posterior.
†Reviewed by Drancourt et al. (7).
‡These patients were considered to have suspected cases.
References
- Raoult D, Birg ML, La Scola B, Fournier PE, Enea M, Lepidi H, Cultivation of the bacillus of Whipple’s disease. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:620–5. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Fenollar F, Puechal X, Raoult D. Whipple’s disease. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:55–66. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Font RL, Rao NA, Issarescu S, McEntee WJ. Ocular involvement in Whipple’s disease: light and electron microscopic observations. Arch Ophthalmol. 1978;96:1431–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Durant WJ, Flood T, Goldberg MF, Tso MO, Pasquali LA, Peyman GA. Vitrectomy and Whipple’s disease. Arch Ophthalmol. 1984;102:848–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Selsky EJ, Knox DL, Maumenee AE, Green WR. Ocular involvement in Whipple’s disease. Retina. 1984;4:103–6. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Williams JG, Edward DP, Tessler HH, Persing DH, Mitchell PS, Goldstein DA. Ocular manifestations of Whipple disease: an atypical presentation. Arch Ophthalmol. 1998;116:1232–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Drancourt M, Berger P, Terrada C, Bodaghi B, Conrath J, Raoult D, High prevalence of fastidious bacteria in 1,520 cases of uveitis of unknown etiology. Medicine (Baltimore). 2008;87:167–76. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Davis JL, Miller DM, Ruiz P. Diagnostic testing of vitrectomy specimens. Am J Ophthalmol. 2005;140:822–9. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Knox DL, Green WR, Troncoso JC, Yardley JH, Hsu J, Zee DS. Cerebral ocular Whipple’s disease: a 62-year odyssey from death to diagnosis. Neurology. 1995;45:617–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Mahnel R, Kalt A, Ring S, Stallmach A, Strober W, Marth T. Immunosuppressive therapy in Whipple’s disease patients is associated with the appearance of gastrointestinal manifestations. Am J Gastroenterol. 2005;100:1167–73. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
Page created: December 16, 2010
Page updated: December 16, 2010
Page reviewed: December 16, 2010
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.