4 research outputs found

    A 7-year review of clinical characteristics, predisposing factors and outcomes of post-keratoplasty infectious keratitis: the Nottingham infectious keratitis study

    Get PDF
    Background/objectives: Post-keratoplasty infectious keratitis (PKIK) is a unique sight-threatening clinical entity which often poses significant therapeutic challenges. This study aimed to examine the clinical presentation, risk factors, management, and clinical outcomes of PKIK. Methods: This was a retrospective study of all patients who presented to the Queen’s Medical Centre, Nottingham, with PKIK between September 2015 and August 2022 (a 7-year period). Relevant data on types of keratoplasty, clinical presentations, causative microorganisms, management, and outcome were analyzed. Results: Forty-nine PKIK cases, including four cases of interface infectious keratitis, were identified during the study period. The most common graft indications for PKP, DALK and EK were failed grafts (9, 37.5%), keratoconus (6, 54.5%) and Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (FECD; 8, 57.1%), respectively. Staphylococcus spp. were the most commonly identified organisms (15, 50.0%). Bullous keratopathy (18, 36.7%), ocular surface disease (18, 36.7%), and broken/loose sutures (15, 30.6%) were the most common risk factors. Concurrent use of topical steroids was identified in 25 (51.0%) cases. Of 31 functioning grafts at presentation, 12 (38.7%) grafts failed at final follow-up with 15 (48.4%) patients retaining a CDVA of ≥1.0 logMAR. The overall estimated 5-year survival rate post-PKIK was 55.9% (95% CI, 35.9%-75.9%), with DALK having the highest survival rate [63.6% (95% CI, 28.9%-98.3%)], followed by EK [57.1% (95% CI, 20.4%-93.8%)] and PKP [52.7% (95% CI, 25.1%-80.3%)], though no statistical difference was observed (p=0.48). Conclusions: PKIK represents an important cause of IK and graft failure. Bullous keratopathy, OSD and suture-related complications are the commonest risk factors, highlighting the potential benefit of prophylactic topical antibiotics (for unhealthy ocular surface) and early suture removal (where possible) in reducing the risk of PKIK. Graft survival may be higher in lamellar keratoplasty following PKIK but larger studies are required to elucidate this observation

    Trainee research network (TRN): a potential global model for promoting research training and outputs among trainees.

    No full text
    The article is available via Open Access. Click on the 'Additional link' above to access the full-text.Accepted version (6 month embargo), submitted versio

    Diagnostic performance of deep learning in infectious keratitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

    Get PDF
    Introduction Infectious keratitis (IK) represents the fifth-leading cause of blindness worldwide. A delay in diagnosis is often a major factor in progression to irreversible visual impairment and/or blindness from IK. The diagnostic challenge is further compounded by low microbiological culture yield, long turnaround time, poorly differentiated clinical features and polymicrobial infections. In recent years, deep learning (DL), a subfield of artificial intelligence, has rapidly emerged as a promising tool in assisting automated medical diagnosis, clinical triage and decision-making, and improving workflow efficiency in healthcare services. Recent studies have demonstrated the potential of using DL in assisting the diagnosis of IK, though the accuracy remains to be elucidated. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to critically examine and compare the performance of various DL models with clinical experts and/or microbiological results (the current ‘gold standard’) in diagnosing IK, with an aim to inform practice on the clinical applicability and deployment of DL-assisted diagnostic models.Methods and analysis This review will consider studies that included application of any DL models to diagnose patients with suspected IK, encompassing bacterial, fungal, protozoal and/or viral origins. We will search various electronic databases, including EMBASE and MEDLINE, and trial registries. There will be no restriction to the language and publication date. Two independent reviewers will assess the titles, abstracts and full-text articles. Extracted data will include details of each primary studies, including title, year of publication, authors, types of DL models used, populations, sample size, decision threshold and diagnostic performance. We will perform meta-analyses for the included primary studies when there are sufficient similarities in outcome reporting.Ethics and dissemination No ethical approval is required for this systematic review. We plan to disseminate our findings via presentation/publication in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration number CRD42022348596
    corecore