ArticleAmerican journal of ophthalmology case reports2025
Presumed bilateral acute idiopathic maculopathy in a pediatric patient.
Article in American journal of ophthalmology case reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: To describe a rare case of presumed bilateral acute idiopathic maculopathy (AIM) in a pediatric patient. Observation: An 11-year-old male was evaluated for a "fuzzy Dorito-shaped" spot in the central vision of his right eye (OD) that started 3 days before presenting to our clinic. On examination, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was counting fingers at 5 feet OD, and 20/25 in the left eye (OS). Fundus examination demonstrated a central macular lesion with pigmentary changes OD and mild retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) changes OS. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging showed elevated, irregular RPE with overlying subretinal fluid in the fovea OD and trace ellipsoid zone changes temporal to the fovea OS. Uveitis work-up was unremarkable for any infectious or inflammatory etiologies. Given the severe vision loss in the right eye and the negative infectious work-up, the decision was made to initiate oral corticosteroids in agreement with the patient's family. One week following the initial presentation, the patient developed visual symptoms OS without much improvement OD. The patient was admitted to the hospital, and further work-up revealed elevated coxsackie B3 antibody titers (1:20). Given the characteristic findings on multimodal imaging and elevated coxsackie B3 antibodies, the patient was presumptively diagnosed with bilateral AIM. Over the following 4 months, he would intermittently complain of nonspecific visual complaints such as blurry vision and floaters requiring an increase in corticosteroid dose and addition of immunomodulatory therapy, although the clinical examination and OCT findings remained unchanged. At the patient's follow-up visit 8 months after the initial visit, BCVA was stable at 20/40 OD and 20/30 OS, and OCT demonstrated stable foveal lesions in both eyes. Conclusion: This case report describes a rare presentation of presumed bilateral AIM in a pediatric patient. This prompts further consideration of this condition in pediatric patients, especially after a prodromal flu-like illness.
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.