ArticleMedicine2019
Incidence of recurrent fungal keratitis after primary keratoplasty and visual outcome and prognosis after intervention for the recurrence.
Article in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- In Vivo Confocal Microscopy and Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography in Optimizing Diagnosis and Therapeutic Management in Fungal Keratitis: Case Reports and Literature Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Dectin-1 participates in the immune-inflammatory response to mouseFrontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Local application of silver nitrate as an adjuvant treatment before deep lamellar keratoplasty for fungal keratitis poorly responsive to medical treatment.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Review
- Improved Topical Ophthalmic Natamycin Suspension for the Treatment of Fungal Keratitis.Journal of ocular pharmacology and therapeutics : the official journal of the Association for Ocular Pharmacology and TherapeuticsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are no standardized protocols or guidelines for the treatment of recurrent fungal keratitis after therapeutic keratoplasty. This study aimed to investigate the incidence of recurrent fungal keratitis after the primary keratoplasty and the visual outcome and prognosis after intervention for the recurrence.This was a retrospective study. Patients with recurrent fungal keratitis after lamellar keratoplasty (LK) or penetrating keratoplasty (PK) were treated with different antifungal regimens at Shandong Eye Hospital and Qingdao Eye Hospital between Januray 2004 and December 2015. The operative techniques included PK, focal excision, tectonic keratoplasty with a patch graft, lensectomy and vitrectomy, and combined operation. Patients were followed at 1, 2, and 3 months, and then every 6 months after surgery for 2 years. Best corrected visual acuity was assessed and recurrence was recorded. Good prognosis was defined as the presence of visual acuity.Fungal keratitis recurred in 112 of 1448 patients (112/1448, 7.7%) treated initially with PK or LK. The good prognosis rates for different sites of recurrent fungal keratitis were: overall, 93 of 112 (83.0%); recipient bed, 64 of 69 (92.8%); anterior chamber, 14 of 14 (100%); posterior segment, 10 of 16 (62.5%); and atypical, 5 of 13 (38.5%). There was no significant difference in the timing of recurrence between the good and poor prognosis groups (P = .518). Recurrence rates were similar between patients with PK (8.6%) and those with LK (6.0%; P > .05), but the good prognosis rate in patients with post-LK recurrence (96.8%) was higher than that in patients with post-PK recurrence (77.8%, P = .017).Individualized treatment according to recurrent sites of fungal keratitis can achieve a good prognosis in most patients.
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.