Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36060041›Full record

ReviewJournal of current glaucoma practice

Glaucoma in Viral Keratouveitis: A Retrospective Review at a Tertiary Eye Hospital.

Priyanka Sudhakar, Meena Menon, Minija Ck, Anand Balasubramaniam

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of current glaucoma practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Priyanka SudhakarDepartment of Glaucoma, Sankara Eye Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.
Meena MenonDepartment of Glaucoma, Sankara Eye Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.
Minija CkDepartment of Uvea services, Sankara Eye Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.
Anand BalasubramaniamDepartment of Cornea, Sankara Eye Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Viral keratouveitis (VKU) could be visually debilitating owing to the intraocular inflammation causing collateral damage to the cornea and secondary elevation of intraocular pressure (IOP). In this retrospective, single-center, observational study, we analyze the clinical features and management options for VKU, with a brief review on incidence of glaucoma and its treatment outcomes. We reviewed the outpatient records at our tertiary hospital from 2015 to 2020 and found 53 eyes of 55 patients diagnosed as VKU. The main outcome measures were incidence of clinical signs, elevated IOP and glaucoma, and treatment modalities used. Sixty-four percent were males with a mean age of onset being 45.4 years. Eighty percent of the eyes were clinically diagnosed to have herpes simplex virus (HSV), 16% herpes zoster virus (HZV) and 4% cytomegalovirus (CMV). Ocular presentations most commonly noted were keratic precipitates (70.4%), corneal edema (66.7%). Associated elevation of IOP was seen in 24 eyes (44%), while glaucomatous damage was seen in 20% of the eyes. Those with fewer uveitic episodes (less than two), as opposed to those having more than two episodes ( How to cite this article: Sudhakar P, Menon M, CK M,

Indexed as

Ahmed glaucoma valveAntiglaucoma medicationCytomegalovirusHerpes simplex virusIntraocular pressureOcular hypertensionTransscleral cyclophotocoagulationUveitic glaucomaVaricella ZosterViral keratouveitis

Identifiers

PMID36060041
PMCPMC9385385

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.