ReviewIrish journal of medical science2024
Treatment outcomes of PCR-positive acute retinal necrosis.
Review in Irish journal of medical science, 2024. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of Patients with Acute Retinal Necrosis (ARN) presenting to a Canadian tertiary care centre: a 5-year retrospective cohort study.Journal of ophthalmic inflammation and infection · 2026Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcute retinal necrosis (ARN) is a progressive necrotizing retinitis caused by viral infection. Optimal management strategies have not been established for this detrimental disease. Previous literature published suggests that Varicella-zoster virus (VZV) and Herpes simplex virus-1 (HSV1) are the most common promoters of acute retinal necrosis (ARN).
aimsThe purpose of our study was to investigate the viral distribution, demographic, and treatment outcomes of ARN.
methodsA retrospective chart review evaluated data from PCR-positive ARN patients diagnosed between 2009 and 2018.
resultsAnalysis of fourteen eyes from 12 patients found CMV and VZV as the commonest causes of ARN. Patients on 1 g of valacyclovir three times a day (V1T) had worse vision between first and final visits (mean difference of 1.25 ± 0.65, n = 2) compared with patients treated with 2 g of valacyclovir three times a day (V2T), or 900 mg twice a day of valganciclovir (V9B) (mean difference of - 0.067 ± 0.13, n = 6, and 0.067 ± 0.067, n = 6, respectively). Both V1T patients developed retinal detachments (RD). Both CMV patients treated with intravitreal triamcinolone developed ARN, elevated IOP, and one developed multiple RD.
conclusionsOur review found increased incidence of CMV-positive ARN. Patients with zone 1 disease had worse initial visual acuity. Moreover, patients had more favorable outcomes with V2T and V9B compared to V1T. CMV-positive patients clinically worsened after intravitreal steroid injections, further underscoring the value of a PCR diagnosis to tailor the patients' treatment plan accordingly.
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.