Clinical manifestations and outcome of syphilitic uveitis

Publication date

2016-02-01

Authors

Bollemeijer, Jan G.
Wieringa, Wietse G.
Missotten, Tom O.A.R.
Meenken, Ina
ten Dam-van Loon, NinetteISNI 0000000387928516
Rothova, A.ISNI 0000000387125393
Los, Leonoor I.

Editors

Advisors

Supervisors

Document Type

Article

Collections

Open Access logo

License

cc_by_nc_nd

Abstract

PURPOSE. To analyze visual outcome, effectiveness of various modes of antibiotic treatment, and prognostic factors in patients with serologically proven syphilitic uveitis. METHODS. The clinical records of 85 patients (139 eyes) diagnosed with syphilitic uveitis between 1984 and 2013 at tertiary centers in The Netherlands were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS. Mean age was 47 years (range, 27–73 years), 82.4% were male. HIV positivity was found in 28 (35.9%) patients; 13 were newly diagnosed. Most patients had pan (45.9%) or posterior (31.8%) uveitis. On average, logMAR visual acuity (VA) improved significantly from 0.55 at the start of syphilis treatment to 0.34 at 1 month and to 0.27 at 6 months follow-up. Most patients (86.7%) reached disease remission. No differences in efficacy between the various treatment regimens were found. A high logMAR VA at the start of syphilis treatment and a treatment delay of more than 12 weeks were prognostic for a high logMAR VA at 6 months follow-up. Chronicity was not related to any form of treatment, HIV status, or Venereal Disease Research Laboratory test outcome. CONCLUSIONS. In this large cohort of 85 patients with syphilitic uveitis, visual outcomes were favorable in the majority of cases. Visual outcome was dependent on VA at the start of syphilis treatment and treatment delay.

Keywords

Syphilis, Treatment outcome, Uveitis, Ophthalmology, Sensory Systems, Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience

Citation

Bollemeijer, J G, Wieringa, W G, Missotten, T O A R, Meenken, I, ten Dam-van Loon, N H, Rothova, A & Los, L I 2016, 'Clinical manifestations and outcome of syphilitic uveitis', Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 404-411. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.15-17906