ArticleBMC ophthalmology2023
Clinical and in vivo confocal microscopy characteristics of Candida keratitis following keratoplasty.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- In vivo confocal microscopy findings from full corneal epithelial debridement and local corticosteroid for recurrent corneal erosion.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Clinical Characteristics and In Vivo Confocal Microscopic Study in Candida Keratitis.Translational vision science & technology · 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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe present six patients who developed Candida keratitis postoperatively. The clinical features, diagnostic testing including in vivo confocal microscopy, and outcomes are presented.
methodsSix patients who developed Candida keratitis following penetrating and endothelial keratoplasty, were referred to Tianjin Medical University Eye Hospital between 2018 to 2021.The diagnosis was established following cultures of either corneal scraping or biopsy. In vivo confocal microscopy examination was also performed to confirm the diagnosis and characterize the morphology, distribution and the depth of Candida spp. All patients were treated with topical voriconazole (VCZ) 1% and natamycin (NTM) 5%. Patients with mid/deep stromal keratitis or interface infection were treated additionally with intrastromal or interface VCZ irrigation (0.05 mg/0.1mL).
resultsThe cultures of corneal scrapings (4 cases) or biopsies (2 cases) were all positive for Candida spp. In vivo confocal microscopy examination was positive for fungal elements in five of the six patients. The infection resolved in five of the six patients. The patients' final uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) ranged from hand movements (HM) to 20/80.
conclusionIn vivo confocal microscopy is a useful non-invasive clinical technique for confirming the diagnosis of Candida keratitis. Intrastromal and interface irrigated VCZ injections are effective treatment options.
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.