Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30904540›Full record

Trial reportOphthalmology2019

Mycotic Antimicrobial Localized Injection: A Randomized Clinical Trial Evaluating Intrastromal Injection of Voriconazole.

Shivananda Narayana, Tiruvengada Krishnan, Seema Ramakrishnan, Puja Prativa Samantaray, Ariana Austin, Julia Pickel, Travis Porco, Tom Lietman, Jennifer Rose-Nussbaumer

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Adjunctive povidone-iodine forAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2026
    Trial
  2. Sulfur Vacancy-Rich MoSAdvanced healthcare materials · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Fungal Keratitis: Diagnosis, Management, and Recent Advances.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Management of Filamentous Fungal Keratitis: A Pragmatic Approach.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Journal of clinical medicine · 2021
    Review
  17. Recent Perspectives in the Management of Fungal Keratitis.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Shivananda NarayanaAravind Eye Hospital, Pondicherry, India.
Tiruvengada KrishnanAravind Eye Hospital, Pondicherry, India.
Seema RamakrishnanAravind Eye Hospital, Pondicherry, India.
Puja Prativa SamantarayAravind Eye Hospital, Pondicherry, India.
Ariana AustinFrancis I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Julia PickelFrancis I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Travis PorcoFrancis I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Tom LietmanFrancis I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California; Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Jennifer Rose-NussbaumerFrancis I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California; Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California. Electronic address: jennifer.rose-nussbaumer@ucsf.edu.
University of California, San Francisco · USAravind Eye Hospital · IN

Funding

Predictions of Response to Treatment in Fungal KeratitisK23EY025025 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI ROSE-NUSSBAUMER, JENNIFER · 2015 to 2019
$1.2M
NEI NIH HHS K23 EY025025
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo determine if there is a benefit to adjuvant intrastromal voriconazole (ISV) injections for primary treatment of filamentous fungal keratitis.

designOutcome-masked, randomized controlled clinical trial.

participantsPatients with moderate vision loss resulting from a smear-positive fungal ulcer.

methodsStudy eyes were randomized to topical natamycin plus ISV injection versus topical natamycin alone.

main outcome measuresThe primary outcome of the trial was microbiological cure on 3-day repeat culture analysis. Secondary outcomes included microbiological cure on 7-day repeat culture analysis; 3-week and 3-month best spectacle-corrected visual acuity; infiltrate or scar size or both; rate of perforation; therapeutic penetrating keratoplasty (TPK); and other adverse events.

resultsA total of 151 patients with smear-positive ulcers were screened and 70 were enrolled at Aravind Eye Hospital, Pondicherry, India. Baseline cultures grew Fusarium in 19 samples (27%), Aspergillus in 17 samples (24%), and other filamentous fungi in 19 samples (27%) and showed negative results in 13 samples (19%). Those randomized to ISV injection had 1.82 times the odds of 3-day culture positivity after controlling for baseline culture status (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65-5.23; P = 0.26, bias-corrected logistic regression) and 1.98 times the odds of positive 7-day culture results, after controlling for baseline culture status (95% CI, 0.69-5.91; P = 0.20, bias-corrected logistic regression). Those randomized to ISV injection showed 0.5 logMAR lines (approximately 0.5 Snellen lines) of decreased visual acuity (95% CI, -2.6 to 3.6 lines; P = 0.75) and 0.55 mm worse infiltrate or scar size or both at 3 months after controlling for baseline values (95% CI, -0.13 to 1.25; P = 0.11). Intrastromal voriconazole injections showed a 2.85-fold increased hazard of perforation after controlling for baseline infiltrate depth (95% CI, 0.76-10.75; P = 0.12) but no difference in the rate of TPK (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.44-2.04; P = 0.90).

conclusionsThere seems to be no benefit to adding ISV injections to topical natamycin in the primary treatment of moderate to severe filamentous fungal ulcers. Studies consistently suggest that voriconazole has a limited role in the treatment of filamentous fungal ulcers.

Indexed as

AdultAntifungal AgentsEye Infections, FungalFemaleFungiHumansInjections, IntraocularKeratitisMaleMiddle AgedNatamycinVoriconazoleAntifungal AgentsNatamycinVoriconazole

Identifiers

PMID30904540
PMCPMC6646068
OpenAlexW2923682645

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.