ArticleBMC ophthalmology2021
Comparison of causative microorganisms of posttraumatic endophthalmitis with and without retained intraocular foreign bodies.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2021. 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.
- International consensuses and guidelines on diagnosing and managing fungal endophthalmitis by the Asia-Pacific Vitreo-retina Society (APVRS), the Academy of the Asia-Pacific Professors of Ophthalmology (AAPPO), and the Asia-Pacific Society of Ocular Inflammation and Infection (APSOII).Eye and vision (London, England) · 2025Review
- Article
- Use of Optical Coherence Tomography and Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography in the Diagnosis and Follow-Up of EndogenousMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- The Diagnostic Value of Triggering Receptor Expressed on Myeloid Cells-1 in Post-Traumatic Bacterial Endophthalmitis.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2023Article
- The Diagnosis and Treatment of Fungal Endophthalmitis: An Update.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe goals of this work were to report the demographic characteristics of patients with clinically diagnosed endophthalmitis with or without intraocular foreign bodies (IOFBs) and to analyze the causative microorganisms.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 1257 patients with clinically diagnosed posttraumatic endophthalmitis who were admitted to Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center between January 1, 2013, and August 31, 2020.
resultsOf the 1257 patients with clinically diagnosed posttraumatic endophthalmitis, 452 (36.0%) patients had IOFBs. Male dominance was more common among the patients with IOFBs than the patients without IOFBs. The average age of the patients with IOFBs was older than that of the patients without IOFBs. The most common microbial pathogens in these two groups were Gram-positive cocci and Gram-negative bacilli. Gram-positive bacilli were more common in the patients with IOFBs than in those without IOFBs (17.9 vs. 9.4%), and Bacillus spp. accounted for 12.6 and 5.5%, respectively. Fungi were less abundant in the patients with IOFBs than in those without IOFBs (8.0 vs. 15.6%).
conclusionsPatients with IOFBs were mostly male and older than those without IOFBs. Gram-positive bacilli were more common and fungi were less common in patients with IOFBs than in those without IOFBs.
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.