ArticleSaudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological Society
Interface keratitis following endothelial keratoplasty.
Article in Saudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological Society. 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
Infectious interface keratitis (IIK) is an uncommon but potentially vision-threatening complication following posterior lamellar keratoplasty, including Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (EK) and Descemet membrane EK. The interface space allows microbial sequestration, limits antimicrobial penetration, and complicates microbiologic diagnosis. This review summarizes epidemiology, microbiology, clinical presentation, management strategies, and outcomes of IIK after EK, with an emphasis on surgical decision-making. Across reviews and case series, Candida remains the predominant organism causing IIK after EK. In certain cases, selected localized infections may be considered as graft-sparing candidates for interface drainage and/or directed intrastromal antimicrobial therapy. While others - particularly fungal and atypical infections - require escalation to repeat keratoplasty or therapeutic penetrating keratoplasty (TPK). IIK following EK should be approached as a deep-seated infection in an anatomically secluded space. When clinical progression is observed or diagnosis remains uncertain, early intervention and timely "source control" are central to management. Targeted intrastromal and/or interface therapy may preserve the original EK graft in carefully selected cases, whereas TPK remains the most definitive approach, especially for progressive or medically refractory infection.
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.