Observational studyBMC infectious diseases2024
Endophthalmitis patients in Makassar City: molecular identification of pathogenic fungal profile.
Observational study in BMC infectious diseases, 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.
- Identification and Biocontrol of Pathogenic Fungi Causing Root Rot ofJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndophthalmitis is a severe inflammation of the internal ocular structures, usually caused by bacterial or fungal infections, and can lead to rapid, irreversible blindness. Fungal endophthalmitis (FE), primarily due to Candida albicans and Aspergillus, is less common than bacterial endophthalmitis but has shown an increase in prevalence over the past two decades. Diagnosing FE is challenging and often delayed due to the time-consuming nature of traditional culture methods. The timely initiation of targeted antifungal therapy based on the specific fungal pathogen identified by molecular method can improve patient outcomes and reduce the risk of vision loss. This study aims to determine the presence of pathogenic fungal infections in patients with endophthalmitis using molecular methods at Hasanuddin University Hospital Makassar.
methodsThis cross-sectional observational study analyzed 83 intraocular fluid samples from patients with endophthalmitis at Hasanuddin University Hospital, Makassar, Indonesia. Samples were examined using microscopy, culture, and molecular methods, including polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) sequencing.
resultsThe study population comprised 49 males (59%) and 34 females (41%), with an average age of 45.85 years. The distribution of affected eyes was nearly equal, with 50.6% involving the right eye and 49.4% involving the left eye. Exogenous transmission, primarily related to external risk factors such as ocular trauma or surgical procedures, was identified as the most common mode of fungal transmission in this population (97.6%). No fungal elements were detected through microscopy or culture; however, PCR could identify 5 positive samples (6%); 3 were males and 2 were females; all have exogenous transmission, predominantly showing Candida species. Sequencing revealed Candida parapsilosis, Lodderomyces beijingensis, and Trichophyton rubrum among the findings.
conclusionCases of fungal endophthalmitis are rare but increasing, posing diagnostic challenges. Our study concludes that PCR is more effective than traditional culture methods in identifying fungal pathogens, with a predominance of Candida species identified in endophthalmitis. Molecular techniques like PCR offer rapid and accurate diagnosis, improving patient treatment outcomes by enabling earlier initiation of targeted antifungal therapy.
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.