ArticleCase reports in ophthalmology2014
Rhodotorula keratitis: a rarely encountered ocular pathogen.
Article in Case reports in ophthalmology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Molecular identification, biofilm formation and antifungal susceptibility of Rhodotorula spp.Molecular biology reports · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo describe a case of fungal keratitis involving an atypical organism with confirmatory in vivo confocal microscopy and to review the literature on Rhodotorula keratitis.
methodsCase report and review of the medical literature.
resultsA 22-year-old college student was struck in the left eye with a tree branch and subsequently developed pain, redness and photophobia. Upon presentation, visual acuity was 20/200 and there was a large epithelial defect with diffuse stromal inflammation involving the anterior one-third of the cornea. Cultures of the infiltrate were performed for bacterial, viral and fungal organisms that resulted in a positive culture for Rhodotorula mucilaginosa. Fungal elements were confirmed in vivo by confocal microscopy. The patient was treated with voriconazole initially and had amphotericin added once Rhodotorula infection was confirmed. The patient responded well clinically, and one month after therapy was initiated, the corneal infiltrate had resolved leaving mild anterior stromal haze. Upon completion of therapy at three months, the patient was asymptomatic, had a clear cornea and had a best corrected visual acuity of 20/20 in the involved eye. There was no measurable change in his manifest refraction.
conclusionsPrior cases of Rhodotorula keratitis most often required surgical intervention and were associated with poor outcomes. This case shows that Rhodotorula keratitis can be successfully treated with topical antifungal agents if diagnosed early and appropriate treatment is initiated promptly. We report the first case of Rhodotorula keratitis confirmed by in vivo confocal microscopy. This is also the first description of pseudomycelium formation that has not been previously described in vivo, a morphological structure that this organism rarely demonstrates. Finally, this case shows that confocal microscopy may aid in the early diagnosis and management of fungal keratitis involving this rare but potentially damaging organism.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.