ArticleBMJ case reports2017
Central serous chorioretinopathy secondary to tuberculosis: cause or coincidence.
Article in BMJ case reports, 2017. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bilateral Central Serous Chorioretinopathy Associated With Tuberculosis in a Female Patient.Cureus · 2025Article
- Concomitant cavernous sinus thrombosis and central serous chorioretinopathy in a patient with total ophthalmoplegia and monocular blindness: a case report.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2023Article
- Efficacy of oral rifampicin in chronic central serous chorioretinopathy.Therapeutic advances in ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
32-year-old male with diagnosis of central serous chorioretinopathy (CSCR) in both eyes and negative history of administration of any medicine was treated with bilateral focal laser at leakage point, with visual recovery. Recurrence occurred after 2 years in right eye and was treated successfully with acetazolamide. Second recurrence occurred after 1 year. Acetazolamide was restarted, but no improvement was noted. Thorough re-evaluation of the patient revealed a family history of tuberculosis. Ancillary investigations rendered the presumptive diagnosis of tuberculosis, and antituberculosis treatment led to visual recovery with no recurrences. Present case poses two dilemmas: whether CSCR was secondary to tuberculosis or was it an incidental association in tuberculosis endemic population and second whether resolution occurred due to the treatment of tuberculosis or due to mineralo-corticoid antagonism action of rifampicin. Significance of patient's history, clinical observation and angiographic studies in the diagnosis of idiopathic and recurrent CSCR is reiterated.
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.