| Literature DB >> 31238406 |
Ajit Kumar1, Ashi Khurana1, Mohit Sharma2, Lokesh Chauhan3.
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of the study is to identify risk factors, clinical characteristics, causative fungi, and treatment outcome of dematiaceous fungal keratitis in North India.Entities:
Keywords: Alternaria; Curvularia; Epicoccum; Ulocladium; Uttar Pradesh; dematiaceous fungi; keratitis
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31238406 PMCID: PMC6611278 DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_1612_18
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Indian J Ophthalmol ISSN: 0301-4738 Impact factor: 1.848
Figure 1Monthly trend of culture proven dematiaceous keratitis patients presented to cornea clinic
Month wise distribution of dematiaceous fungal keratitis
| ORGANISM | Month | Total | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| JAN | FEB | MAR | APR | MAY | JUN | JUL | AUG | SEP | OCT | NOV | DEC | ||
| 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | × | × | 2 | 1 | 12 | 19 | 14 | × | 55 | |
| × | 2 | × | 2 | × | 1 | 1 | × | × | × | 5 | 1 | 12 | |
| × | 1 | × | × | × | 1 | 2 | × | × | × | 1 | × | 5 | |
| 1 | × | × | 2 | × | 1 | × | × | × | × | 1 | × | 5 | |
| × | 1 | × | × | × | 1 | × | × | × | × | 1 | × | 3 | |
| × | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | 2 | × | × | 2 | |
| × | × | × | 1 | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | 1 | |
| Total | 2 | 7 | 2 | 6 | × | 4 | 5 | 1 | 12 | 21 | 22 | 1 | 83 |
Nature of trauma
| Nature of trauma | Number | Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| Sugarcane | 17 | 30.4% |
| Plant leaf | 13 | 23.2% |
| Wood | 8 | 14.3% |
| Dust | 5 | 8.9% |
| Insect | 4 | 7.1% |
| Paddy | 2 | 3.6% |
| Bed sheet | 1 | 1.8% |
| Buffalo tail | 1 | 1.8% |
| Finger | 1 | 1.8% |
| Hand | 1 | 1.8% |
| Powder | 1 | 1.8% |
| Soap | 1 | 1.8% |
| Stone | 1 | 1.8% |
Comparison of previous studies on dematiaceous fungal keratitis with the present study
| Dematiaceous fungal isolate | Sengupta | Garg | Kumar |
|---|---|---|---|
| 84 (72%) | 20 (22.7%) | 55 (66.3%) | |
| 8 (6.8%) | 13 (14.7%) | 5 (6.1%) | |
| 0 (0%) | 3 (3.4%) | 0 (0%) | |
| 0 (0%) | 3 (3.4%) | 0 (0%) | |
| 4 (3.4%) | 2 (2.2%) | 12 (14.5%) | |
| 0 (0%) | 2 (2.2%) | 0 (0%) | |
| 0 (0%) | 2 (2.2%) | 0 (0%) | |
| 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 5 (6%) | |
| 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 3 (3.6%) | |
| 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 2 (2.4%) | |
| 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 1 (1.2%) |
Cross-tabulation of presenting VA and final VA (n=53)
| Presenting VA | VA at last follow-up | Total | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| >20/30 | <20/30 to 20/60 | <20/60 to 20/200 | <20/200 | ||
| >20/30 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 |
| <20/30 to 20/60 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 7 |
| <20/60 to 20/200 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 3 | 11 |
| <20/200 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 11 | 21 |
| Total | 20 | 11 | 7 | 15 | 53 |
| Pearson Chi-square | 40.510a | 9 | 0.00 | ||
| Likelihood ratio | 46.679 | 9 | 0.00 | ||
| Fisher's exact test | 38.561 | 0.00 | |||
a13 cells (81.2%) have expected count <5
Distribution of final visual acuity achieved in patients with mono and mixed infections
| Infection Type | Final Visual Acuity | Total | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| >20/30 | 20/30-20/60 | 20/60-20/200 | <20/200 | ||
| Mixed infection | 0 | 4 | 0 | 2 | 6 |
| Mono infection | 16 | 11 | 7 | 13 | 47 |
| Total | 16 | 15 | 7 | 15 | 53 |
| Pearson Chi-square | 6.515a | 3 | 0.060b | ||
| Likelihood ratio | 8.258 | 3 | 0.053b | ||
| Fisher's exact test | 5.371 | 0.083b | |||
a4 cells (50.0%) have expected count <5. The minimum expected count is 0.79. bBased on 10,000 sampled tables