ArticleHealth science reports2026
What We Can Do in Infectious Keratitis, Except for Conventional Antimicrobial-Based Therapies: Major Narrative Review.
Article in Health science reports, 2026. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Infectious keratitis (IK) is classified as a critical ophthalmic emergency, with the potential to result in vision-impairing complications. The treatment approach involves the use of pharmacological antimicrobial agents in combination with surgical interventions. Traditionally, the management of IK has relied on conventional antimicrobial agents, although the specific treatment regimen may vary based on the underlying causative agent. The growing antimicrobial resistance, along with the less favorable outcomes in most cases, emphasizes the urgent need for adjunctive or novel therapies. This report aims to provide a thorough overview of the current clinical and experimental non-antimicrobial therapies, encompassing both medical and surgical options, whether they serve as adjuncts to antimicrobial treatments or function as independent therapies for IK. Methods: A comprehensive search on PubMed was undertaken to identify relevant articles. Articles that described conventional antimicrobial-based treatments were excluded from the review. Additionally, case reports and non-English publications were not considered. Results: Various therapeutic options, including medical-based therapies (povidone-iodine, matrix metalloproteinases inhibitors, corticosteroids, host defense peptides, novel small molecules, formaldehyde releasers, synthetic polymers, antioxidants, and bacteriophages), laser/light-based therapies (photodynamic therapy, ultraviolet C light, thermal lasers, photothermal therapy, phototherapeutic keratectomy, and blue light), surgical-based therapies (conjunctival flap and Tenon graft, corneal gluing, amniotic membrane transplantation, and keratoplasty), and miscellaneous therapies (nanomedicine and contact lens, plasma ablation, debridement, and cryotherapy) were included and discussed. Conclusion: The conventional approach to managing IK involves the use of topical antimicrobial agents. Most instances can be effectively addressed with empirical treatment using antimicrobial eye drops, yielding satisfactory results. However, it seems the rise in antimicrobial resistance and insufficient response in some cases, especially fungal keratitis, necessitates ophthalmologists to utilize all currently available options in their toolbox more efficiently and intensify research efforts aimed at developing alternative therapeutic strategies.
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.