ArticleInternational ophthalmology2023
Molecular diagnosis of rhino-orbital mucormycosis in a COVID-19 setting.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Automated Mucormycosis Diagnosis from Paranasal CT Using ResNet50 and ConvNeXt Small.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The diagnosis of mucormycosis by PCR in patients at risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMucormycosis is a severe fungal infection caused by species of the order Mucorales. Early and accurate diagnosis is a prerequisite in the management of the disease. In the present study, we evaluated and compared two PCR-based techniques for the diagnosis and identification of mucormycosis in patients with rhino-orbital mucormycosis (ROM) post-COVID-19.
methodsDiagnosed clinically and radiologically, 25 patients of ROM were included in the study and endoscopically or blind collected nasal swabs or orbital tissues were submitted for microbiological evaluation (direct microscopy + culture) and PCR using primers targeting two different loci (ITS and 28S rDNA region) for diagnosis. All PCR products were further processed for species identification using Sanger sequencing whenever possible.
resultOf the 25 samples included in the study, 16 samples were positive for presence of fungal filaments by Smear suggestive of Mucorales sp., but only 7/25 grew in culture. ITS-based PCR was able to identify mucormycosis in 7/25 (28%) samples and 28S rDNA PCR showed positivity for 19/25 (76%) samples. Rhizopus oryzae was found to be the predominant species in our study. The sensitivity and specificity of 28S rDNA PCR compared to culture were found to be 85.71% and 27.78%, respectively, while for ITS-based PCR, they were 42.86% and 77.78%, respectively.
conclusions28S rDNA-based PCR is a reliable and sensitive method for early diagnosis of mucormycosis. Molecular techniques have shown a promising future to provide quick and effective treatment by accurately identifying the aetiologic agent.
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.