ArticleBMC ophthalmology2022
A rare case of congenital pupillary abnormality: a case report.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Rare micropupil secondary to congenital cataract surgery favoring the development of the affected eye: a case report.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCongenital anomalies of the pupil are quite varied, including abnormal size, shape, color, response to stimulus, and function. We are here reporting an unusual case presented with the absence of pupillary opening with folds of iris tissue at the center. Only an extremely small pupil (diameter < 0.5 mm) could be observed during the operation. CASE PRESENTATION: A 15-year-old male patient visited our outpatient clinic due to vision difficulty in his right eye for more than ten years. The best-corrected visual acuity was 2.0 logMAR and 0 logMAR for the right and left eye, respectively. There were amblyopia, astigmatism and constant exotropia in his right eye. Ophthalmic examination of the right eye showed flat iris root, minimal iris pigmentation, and the pupil area was entirely covered by iris tissue. Lens status and fundus evaluation could not be commented. The left eye was found to be within normal limit. Based on ophthalmic examination, the admission diagnosis was given as acorea. Pupilloplasty was performed on the right eye due to the situation that the iris tissue blocked the visual axis, which led to visual impairment and stimulus deprivation amblyopia. However, an extremely small pupil at the center of his pupillary area was observed during the operation. The postoperative course was favorable, and a normal pupil was secured. Hospital discharge diagnosis was given as microcoria, and amblyopia treatment was followed.
conclusionsWe report a rare case of congenital pupillary abnormality. The further diagnosis was given as microcoria, which should be differentiated from acorea. For this kind of pupil disorder which blocks the visual axis, early diagnosis and treatment can help prevent the development of stimulus deprivation amblyopia.
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.