Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33913840›Full record

ReviewIndian journal of ophthalmology2021

Retrospective multifactorial analysis of

Bharat Gurnani, Josephine Christy, Shivananda Narayana, Purushothama Rajkumar, Kirandeep Kaur, Joseph Gubert

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
8.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Immune Camouflage inClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025
    Article
  2. Renaissance of an Emerging Pathogen-Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Clinical differentiation ofIndian journal of ophthalmology · 2022
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Role of Immunotherapy in Pythium insidiosum Keratitis.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2022
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bharat GurnaniCornea and Refractive Surgery Services, Aravind Eye Hospital and Post Graduate Institute of Ophthalmology, Cuddalore Main Road, Thavalukuppam, Pondicherry, India.
Josephine ChristyCornea and Refractive Surgery Services, Aravind Eye Hospital and Post Graduate Institute of Ophthalmology, Cuddalore Main Road, Thavalukuppam, Pondicherry, India.
Shivananda NarayanaCornea and Refractive Surgery Services, Aravind Eye Hospital and Post Graduate Institute of Ophthalmology, Cuddalore Main Road, Thavalukuppam, Pondicherry, India.
Purushothama RajkumarCornea and Refractive Surgery Services, Aravind Eye Hospital and Post Graduate Institute of Ophthalmology, Cuddalore Main Road, Thavalukuppam, Pondicherry, India.
Kirandeep KaurPediatric Ophthalmology and Squint Fellow, Aravind Eye Hospital and Post Graduate Institute of Ophthalmology, Cuddalore Main Road, Thavalukuppam, Pondicherry, India.
Joseph GubertDepartment of Microbiology, Aravind Eye Hospital and Post Graduate Institute of Ophthalmology, Cuddalore Main Road, Thavalukuppam, Pondicherry, India.
Aravind Eye Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this work was to study the demographic profile, clinical diagnostic features, challenges in management, treatment outcomes, and ocular morbidity of microbiological culture-proven Pythium keratitis in a tertiary eye care hospital in South India. Methods: Retrospective analysis of microbiologically proven Pythium keratitis patients was performed at a tertiary eye center from October 2017 to March 2020. Demographic details, risk factors, microbiological investigations, clinical course, and visual outcomes were analyzed. Results: Thirty patients were analyzed. The mean age was 43.1±17.2 years. Most common risk factors were history of injury in 80% and exposure to dirty water in 23.3%. Visual acuity at baseline was 20/30 to perception of light (PL). The most common clinical presentation was stromal infiltrate and hypopyon in 14 (46.6%) patients each. The microbiological confirmation was based on culture on blood agar and vesicles with zoospores formation with incubated leaf carnation method. Seven (23.3%) patients improved with topical 0.2% Linezolid and topical 1% Azithromycin, 19 (63.3%) patients underwent Therapeutic keratoplasty (TPK) and 4 were lost to follow-up. Seven (23.3%) patients had graft reinfection, and 3 (10%) developed endophthalmitis. The final visual acuity was 20/20- 20/200 in 6 (20%) patients, 20/240-20/1200 in 5 (16.6%) patients, hand movement to positive perception of light in 16 patients and no perception of light (Pthisis Bulbi) in 3 (10%) patients. Conclusion: P. insidiosum keratitis is a rapidly progressive infectious keratitis with prolonged and relapsing clinical course. It usually results in irreparable vision loss in majority of the patients. Prompt diagnosis, clinical awareness, and specific treatment options are needed for successfully managing this devastating corneal disease.

Indexed as

KeratitisPythiosisPythiumAdultAnimalsHumansIndiaMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesFurrowingPythium insidiosumPythium keratitistentacleszoospore

Identifiers

PMID33913840
PMCPMC8186601
OpenAlexW3158728315

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.