Infectious keratitis in southern Brazil: a comparison culture negative and culture positive patients

Abstract Purpose: To compare clinical-epidemiological profile and treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients. Methods: Patients with suspected infectious keratitis seen at two ophthalmic hospitals in Curitiba, Brazil, between June 2014 and April 2016, were p...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Maria Cecília Barros Duarte [verfasserIn] Guilherme Nardi Becker [verfasserIn] Guilherme Gubert Muller [verfasserIn] Felipe Francisco Tuon [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch ; Spanisch ; Portugiesisch

Erschienen:	2020

Schlagwörter:	Infectious keratitis Microbial keratitis Corneal ulcer Microbial culture Antibiotic drops

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: Revista Brasileira de Oftalmologia - Sociedade Brasileira de Oftalmologia, 2008, 79(2020), 1, Seite 46-52
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:79 ; year:2020 ; number:1 ; pages:46-52

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.5935/0034-7280.20200009

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ014059762

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ014059762
003	DE-627
005	20230502203938.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230226s2020 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.5935/0034-7280.20200009 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ014059762
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJ38a8a9436fd846568839e9f390641bff
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng \|a spa \|a por
050		0	\|a RE1-994
100	0		\|a Maria Cecília Barros Duarte \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Infectious keratitis in southern Brazil: a comparison culture negative and culture positive patients
264		1	\|c 2020
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a Abstract Purpose: To compare clinical-epidemiological profile and treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients. Methods: Patients with suspected infectious keratitis seen at two ophthalmic hospitals in Curitiba, Brazil, between June 2014 and April 2016, were prospectively studied. Ophthalmological exam with corneal scraping and microbiological tests were performed. Data regarding follow up, surgical interventions and treatment outcome were collected after 12 weeks of the first visit trough medical chart review. From the results of the culture, two groups were formed: culture negative keratitis (CNK) and culture positive keratitis (CPK). Results: According to inclusion criteria 21 patients were classified as culture negative keratitis and 20 patients as culture positive keratitis. The number of patients on antibiotic drops at the first visit was greater in CNK group (90.5% versus 60%; p=0.032). Surgical procedures were necessary in 3 patients (15%) in CNK group and in 7 patients (36,8%) in CPK group (p=0.155). Treatment success was achieved by 85% (17/20) of the patients in CNK group and by 61% (11/18) of the patients in CPK group (p=0.144). There was no significant difference between groups regarding age, gender, place of residence, presence of comorbidities, risk factors for infectious keratitis, duration of symptoms and characteristics of corneal ulcer. Conclusions: Previous treatment with antibiotics correlates with negative culture results. There was no significant difference in treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients.
650		4	\|a Infectious keratitis
650		4	\|a Microbial keratitis
650		4	\|a Corneal ulcer
650		4	\|a Microbial culture
650		4	\|a Antibiotic drops
653		0	\|a Ophthalmology
700	0		\|a Guilherme Nardi Becker \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Guilherme Gubert Muller \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Felipe Francisco Tuon \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t Revista Brasileira de Oftalmologia \|d Sociedade Brasileira de Oftalmologia, 2008 \|g 79(2020), 1, Seite 46-52 \|w (DE-627)56551749X \|w (DE-600)2424259-7 \|x 19828551 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:79 \|g year:2020 \|g number:1 \|g pages:46-52
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.5935/0034-7280.20200009 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/38a8a9436fd846568839e9f390641bff \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-72802020000100046&tlng=en \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbof/v79n1/0034-7280-rbof-79-01-0046.pdf \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/1982-8551 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a SSG-OLC-PHA
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2005
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2009
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2055
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2111
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 79 \|j 2020 \|e 1 \|h 46-52

Indexfelder

author_variant	m c b d mcbd g n b gnb g g m ggm f f t fft
matchkey_str	article:19828551:2020----::netoseaiiisuhrbaiaoprsnutrngtva
hierarchy_sort_str	2020
callnumber-subject-code	RE
publishDate	2020
allfields	10.5935/0034-7280.20200009 doi (DE-627)DOAJ014059762 (DE-599)DOAJ38a8a9436fd846568839e9f390641bff DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng spa por RE1-994 Maria Cecília Barros Duarte verfasserin aut Infectious keratitis in southern Brazil: a comparison culture negative and culture positive patients 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Purpose: To compare clinical-epidemiological profile and treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients. Methods: Patients with suspected infectious keratitis seen at two ophthalmic hospitals in Curitiba, Brazil, between June 2014 and April 2016, were prospectively studied. Ophthalmological exam with corneal scraping and microbiological tests were performed. Data regarding follow up, surgical interventions and treatment outcome were collected after 12 weeks of the first visit trough medical chart review. From the results of the culture, two groups were formed: culture negative keratitis (CNK) and culture positive keratitis (CPK). Results: According to inclusion criteria 21 patients were classified as culture negative keratitis and 20 patients as culture positive keratitis. The number of patients on antibiotic drops at the first visit was greater in CNK group (90.5% versus 60%; p=0.032). Surgical procedures were necessary in 3 patients (15%) in CNK group and in 7 patients (36,8%) in CPK group (p=0.155). Treatment success was achieved by 85% (17/20) of the patients in CNK group and by 61% (11/18) of the patients in CPK group (p=0.144). There was no significant difference between groups regarding age, gender, place of residence, presence of comorbidities, risk factors for infectious keratitis, duration of symptoms and characteristics of corneal ulcer. Conclusions: Previous treatment with antibiotics correlates with negative culture results. There was no significant difference in treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients. Infectious keratitis Microbial keratitis Corneal ulcer Microbial culture Antibiotic drops Ophthalmology Guilherme Nardi Becker verfasserin aut Guilherme Gubert Muller verfasserin aut Felipe Francisco Tuon verfasserin aut In Revista Brasileira de Oftalmologia Sociedade Brasileira de Oftalmologia, 2008 79(2020), 1, Seite 46-52 (DE-627)56551749X (DE-600)2424259-7 19828551 nnns volume:79 year:2020 number:1 pages:46-52 https://doi.org/10.5935/0034-7280.20200009 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/38a8a9436fd846568839e9f390641bff kostenfrei http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-72802020000100046&tlng=en kostenfrei http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbof/v79n1/0034-7280-rbof-79-01-0046.pdf kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1982-8551 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 79 2020 1 46-52
spelling	10.5935/0034-7280.20200009 doi (DE-627)DOAJ014059762 (DE-599)DOAJ38a8a9436fd846568839e9f390641bff DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng spa por RE1-994 Maria Cecília Barros Duarte verfasserin aut Infectious keratitis in southern Brazil: a comparison culture negative and culture positive patients 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Purpose: To compare clinical-epidemiological profile and treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients. Methods: Patients with suspected infectious keratitis seen at two ophthalmic hospitals in Curitiba, Brazil, between June 2014 and April 2016, were prospectively studied. Ophthalmological exam with corneal scraping and microbiological tests were performed. Data regarding follow up, surgical interventions and treatment outcome were collected after 12 weeks of the first visit trough medical chart review. From the results of the culture, two groups were formed: culture negative keratitis (CNK) and culture positive keratitis (CPK). Results: According to inclusion criteria 21 patients were classified as culture negative keratitis and 20 patients as culture positive keratitis. The number of patients on antibiotic drops at the first visit was greater in CNK group (90.5% versus 60%; p=0.032). Surgical procedures were necessary in 3 patients (15%) in CNK group and in 7 patients (36,8%) in CPK group (p=0.155). Treatment success was achieved by 85% (17/20) of the patients in CNK group and by 61% (11/18) of the patients in CPK group (p=0.144). There was no significant difference between groups regarding age, gender, place of residence, presence of comorbidities, risk factors for infectious keratitis, duration of symptoms and characteristics of corneal ulcer. Conclusions: Previous treatment with antibiotics correlates with negative culture results. There was no significant difference in treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients. Infectious keratitis Microbial keratitis Corneal ulcer Microbial culture Antibiotic drops Ophthalmology Guilherme Nardi Becker verfasserin aut Guilherme Gubert Muller verfasserin aut Felipe Francisco Tuon verfasserin aut In Revista Brasileira de Oftalmologia Sociedade Brasileira de Oftalmologia, 2008 79(2020), 1, Seite 46-52 (DE-627)56551749X (DE-600)2424259-7 19828551 nnns volume:79 year:2020 number:1 pages:46-52 https://doi.org/10.5935/0034-7280.20200009 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/38a8a9436fd846568839e9f390641bff kostenfrei http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-72802020000100046&tlng=en kostenfrei http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbof/v79n1/0034-7280-rbof-79-01-0046.pdf kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1982-8551 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 79 2020 1 46-52
allfields_unstemmed	10.5935/0034-7280.20200009 doi (DE-627)DOAJ014059762 (DE-599)DOAJ38a8a9436fd846568839e9f390641bff DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng spa por RE1-994 Maria Cecília Barros Duarte verfasserin aut Infectious keratitis in southern Brazil: a comparison culture negative and culture positive patients 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Purpose: To compare clinical-epidemiological profile and treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients. Methods: Patients with suspected infectious keratitis seen at two ophthalmic hospitals in Curitiba, Brazil, between June 2014 and April 2016, were prospectively studied. Ophthalmological exam with corneal scraping and microbiological tests were performed. Data regarding follow up, surgical interventions and treatment outcome were collected after 12 weeks of the first visit trough medical chart review. From the results of the culture, two groups were formed: culture negative keratitis (CNK) and culture positive keratitis (CPK). Results: According to inclusion criteria 21 patients were classified as culture negative keratitis and 20 patients as culture positive keratitis. The number of patients on antibiotic drops at the first visit was greater in CNK group (90.5% versus 60%; p=0.032). Surgical procedures were necessary in 3 patients (15%) in CNK group and in 7 patients (36,8%) in CPK group (p=0.155). Treatment success was achieved by 85% (17/20) of the patients in CNK group and by 61% (11/18) of the patients in CPK group (p=0.144). There was no significant difference between groups regarding age, gender, place of residence, presence of comorbidities, risk factors for infectious keratitis, duration of symptoms and characteristics of corneal ulcer. Conclusions: Previous treatment with antibiotics correlates with negative culture results. There was no significant difference in treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients. Infectious keratitis Microbial keratitis Corneal ulcer Microbial culture Antibiotic drops Ophthalmology Guilherme Nardi Becker verfasserin aut Guilherme Gubert Muller verfasserin aut Felipe Francisco Tuon verfasserin aut In Revista Brasileira de Oftalmologia Sociedade Brasileira de Oftalmologia, 2008 79(2020), 1, Seite 46-52 (DE-627)56551749X (DE-600)2424259-7 19828551 nnns volume:79 year:2020 number:1 pages:46-52 https://doi.org/10.5935/0034-7280.20200009 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/38a8a9436fd846568839e9f390641bff kostenfrei http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-72802020000100046&tlng=en kostenfrei http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbof/v79n1/0034-7280-rbof-79-01-0046.pdf kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1982-8551 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 79 2020 1 46-52
allfieldsGer	10.5935/0034-7280.20200009 doi (DE-627)DOAJ014059762 (DE-599)DOAJ38a8a9436fd846568839e9f390641bff DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng spa por RE1-994 Maria Cecília Barros Duarte verfasserin aut Infectious keratitis in southern Brazil: a comparison culture negative and culture positive patients 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Purpose: To compare clinical-epidemiological profile and treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients. Methods: Patients with suspected infectious keratitis seen at two ophthalmic hospitals in Curitiba, Brazil, between June 2014 and April 2016, were prospectively studied. Ophthalmological exam with corneal scraping and microbiological tests were performed. Data regarding follow up, surgical interventions and treatment outcome were collected after 12 weeks of the first visit trough medical chart review. From the results of the culture, two groups were formed: culture negative keratitis (CNK) and culture positive keratitis (CPK). Results: According to inclusion criteria 21 patients were classified as culture negative keratitis and 20 patients as culture positive keratitis. The number of patients on antibiotic drops at the first visit was greater in CNK group (90.5% versus 60%; p=0.032). Surgical procedures were necessary in 3 patients (15%) in CNK group and in 7 patients (36,8%) in CPK group (p=0.155). Treatment success was achieved by 85% (17/20) of the patients in CNK group and by 61% (11/18) of the patients in CPK group (p=0.144). There was no significant difference between groups regarding age, gender, place of residence, presence of comorbidities, risk factors for infectious keratitis, duration of symptoms and characteristics of corneal ulcer. Conclusions: Previous treatment with antibiotics correlates with negative culture results. There was no significant difference in treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients. Infectious keratitis Microbial keratitis Corneal ulcer Microbial culture Antibiotic drops Ophthalmology Guilherme Nardi Becker verfasserin aut Guilherme Gubert Muller verfasserin aut Felipe Francisco Tuon verfasserin aut In Revista Brasileira de Oftalmologia Sociedade Brasileira de Oftalmologia, 2008 79(2020), 1, Seite 46-52 (DE-627)56551749X (DE-600)2424259-7 19828551 nnns volume:79 year:2020 number:1 pages:46-52 https://doi.org/10.5935/0034-7280.20200009 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/38a8a9436fd846568839e9f390641bff kostenfrei http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-72802020000100046&tlng=en kostenfrei http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbof/v79n1/0034-7280-rbof-79-01-0046.pdf kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1982-8551 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 79 2020 1 46-52
allfieldsSound	10.5935/0034-7280.20200009 doi (DE-627)DOAJ014059762 (DE-599)DOAJ38a8a9436fd846568839e9f390641bff DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng spa por RE1-994 Maria Cecília Barros Duarte verfasserin aut Infectious keratitis in southern Brazil: a comparison culture negative and culture positive patients 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Purpose: To compare clinical-epidemiological profile and treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients. Methods: Patients with suspected infectious keratitis seen at two ophthalmic hospitals in Curitiba, Brazil, between June 2014 and April 2016, were prospectively studied. Ophthalmological exam with corneal scraping and microbiological tests were performed. Data regarding follow up, surgical interventions and treatment outcome were collected after 12 weeks of the first visit trough medical chart review. From the results of the culture, two groups were formed: culture negative keratitis (CNK) and culture positive keratitis (CPK). Results: According to inclusion criteria 21 patients were classified as culture negative keratitis and 20 patients as culture positive keratitis. The number of patients on antibiotic drops at the first visit was greater in CNK group (90.5% versus 60%; p=0.032). Surgical procedures were necessary in 3 patients (15%) in CNK group and in 7 patients (36,8%) in CPK group (p=0.155). Treatment success was achieved by 85% (17/20) of the patients in CNK group and by 61% (11/18) of the patients in CPK group (p=0.144). There was no significant difference between groups regarding age, gender, place of residence, presence of comorbidities, risk factors for infectious keratitis, duration of symptoms and characteristics of corneal ulcer. Conclusions: Previous treatment with antibiotics correlates with negative culture results. There was no significant difference in treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients. Infectious keratitis Microbial keratitis Corneal ulcer Microbial culture Antibiotic drops Ophthalmology Guilherme Nardi Becker verfasserin aut Guilherme Gubert Muller verfasserin aut Felipe Francisco Tuon verfasserin aut In Revista Brasileira de Oftalmologia Sociedade Brasileira de Oftalmologia, 2008 79(2020), 1, Seite 46-52 (DE-627)56551749X (DE-600)2424259-7 19828551 nnns volume:79 year:2020 number:1 pages:46-52 https://doi.org/10.5935/0034-7280.20200009 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/38a8a9436fd846568839e9f390641bff kostenfrei http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-72802020000100046&tlng=en kostenfrei http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbof/v79n1/0034-7280-rbof-79-01-0046.pdf kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1982-8551 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 79 2020 1 46-52
language	English Spanish Portuguese
source	In Revista Brasileira de Oftalmologia 79(2020), 1, Seite 46-52 volume:79 year:2020 number:1 pages:46-52
sourceStr	In Revista Brasileira de Oftalmologia 79(2020), 1, Seite 46-52 volume:79 year:2020 number:1 pages:46-52
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Infectious keratitis Microbial keratitis Corneal ulcer Microbial culture Antibiotic drops Ophthalmology
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	Revista Brasileira de Oftalmologia
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Maria Cecília Barros Duarte @@aut@@ Guilherme Nardi Becker @@aut@@ Guilherme Gubert Muller @@aut@@ Felipe Francisco Tuon @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2020-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	56551749X
id	DOAJ014059762
language_de	englisch spanisch portugiesisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ014059762</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230502203938.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230226s2020 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.5935/0034-7280.20200009</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ014059762</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ38a8a9436fd846568839e9f390641bff</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield><subfield code="a">spa</subfield><subfield code="a">por</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RE1-994</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Maria Cecília Barros Duarte</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Infectious keratitis in southern Brazil: a comparison culture negative and culture positive patients</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Purpose: To compare clinical-epidemiological profile and treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients. Methods: Patients with suspected infectious keratitis seen at two ophthalmic hospitals in Curitiba, Brazil, between June 2014 and April 2016, were prospectively studied. Ophthalmological exam with corneal scraping and microbiological tests were performed. Data regarding follow up, surgical interventions and treatment outcome were collected after 12 weeks of the first visit trough medical chart review. From the results of the culture, two groups were formed: culture negative keratitis (CNK) and culture positive keratitis (CPK). Results: According to inclusion criteria 21 patients were classified as culture negative keratitis and 20 patients as culture positive keratitis. The number of patients on antibiotic drops at the first visit was greater in CNK group (90.5% versus 60%; p=0.032). Surgical procedures were necessary in 3 patients (15%) in CNK group and in 7 patients (36,8%) in CPK group (p=0.155). Treatment success was achieved by 85% (17/20) of the patients in CNK group and by 61% (11/18) of the patients in CPK group (p=0.144). There was no significant difference between groups regarding age, gender, place of residence, presence of comorbidities, risk factors for infectious keratitis, duration of symptoms and characteristics of corneal ulcer. Conclusions: Previous treatment with antibiotics correlates with negative culture results. There was no significant difference in treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Infectious keratitis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Microbial keratitis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Corneal ulcer</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Microbial culture</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Antibiotic drops</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Ophthalmology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Guilherme Nardi Becker</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Guilherme Gubert Muller</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Felipe Francisco Tuon</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Revista Brasileira de Oftalmologia</subfield><subfield code="d">Sociedade Brasileira de Oftalmologia, 2008</subfield><subfield code="g">79(2020), 1, Seite 46-52</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)56551749X</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2424259-7</subfield><subfield code="x">19828551</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:79</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2020</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:46-52</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.5935/0034-7280.20200009</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/38a8a9436fd846568839e9f390641bff</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-72802020000100046&tlng=en</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbof/v79n1/0034-7280-rbof-79-01-0046.pdf</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1982-8551</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">79</subfield><subfield code="j">2020</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="h">46-52</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	R - Medicine
author	Maria Cecília Barros Duarte
spellingShingle	Maria Cecília Barros Duarte misc RE1-994 misc Infectious keratitis misc Microbial keratitis misc Corneal ulcer misc Microbial culture misc Antibiotic drops misc Ophthalmology Infectious keratitis in southern Brazil: a comparison culture negative and culture positive patients
authorStr	Maria Cecília Barros Duarte
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)56551749X
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	RE1-994
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	19828551
topic_title	RE1-994 Infectious keratitis in southern Brazil: a comparison culture negative and culture positive patients Infectious keratitis Microbial keratitis Corneal ulcer Microbial culture Antibiotic drops
topic	misc RE1-994 misc Infectious keratitis misc Microbial keratitis misc Corneal ulcer misc Microbial culture misc Antibiotic drops misc Ophthalmology
topic_unstemmed	misc RE1-994 misc Infectious keratitis misc Microbial keratitis misc Corneal ulcer misc Microbial culture misc Antibiotic drops misc Ophthalmology
topic_browse	misc RE1-994 misc Infectious keratitis misc Microbial keratitis misc Corneal ulcer misc Microbial culture misc Antibiotic drops misc Ophthalmology
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	Revista Brasileira de Oftalmologia
hierarchy_parent_id	56551749X
hierarchy_top_title	Revista Brasileira de Oftalmologia
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)56551749X (DE-600)2424259-7
title	Infectious keratitis in southern Brazil: a comparison culture negative and culture positive patients
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ014059762 (DE-599)DOAJ38a8a9436fd846568839e9f390641bff
title_full	Infectious keratitis in southern Brazil: a comparison culture negative and culture positive patients
author_sort	Maria Cecília Barros Duarte
journal	Revista Brasileira de Oftalmologia
journalStr	Revista Brasileira de Oftalmologia
callnumber-first-code	R
lang_code	eng spa por
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2020
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	46
author_browse	Maria Cecília Barros Duarte Guilherme Nardi Becker Guilherme Gubert Muller Felipe Francisco Tuon
container_volume	79
class	RE1-994
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Maria Cecília Barros Duarte
doi_str_mv	10.5935/0034-7280.20200009
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	infectious keratitis in southern brazil: a comparison culture negative and culture positive patients
callnumber	RE1-994
title_auth	Infectious keratitis in southern Brazil: a comparison culture negative and culture positive patients
abstract	Abstract Purpose: To compare clinical-epidemiological profile and treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients. Methods: Patients with suspected infectious keratitis seen at two ophthalmic hospitals in Curitiba, Brazil, between June 2014 and April 2016, were prospectively studied. Ophthalmological exam with corneal scraping and microbiological tests were performed. Data regarding follow up, surgical interventions and treatment outcome were collected after 12 weeks of the first visit trough medical chart review. From the results of the culture, two groups were formed: culture negative keratitis (CNK) and culture positive keratitis (CPK). Results: According to inclusion criteria 21 patients were classified as culture negative keratitis and 20 patients as culture positive keratitis. The number of patients on antibiotic drops at the first visit was greater in CNK group (90.5% versus 60%; p=0.032). Surgical procedures were necessary in 3 patients (15%) in CNK group and in 7 patients (36,8%) in CPK group (p=0.155). Treatment success was achieved by 85% (17/20) of the patients in CNK group and by 61% (11/18) of the patients in CPK group (p=0.144). There was no significant difference between groups regarding age, gender, place of residence, presence of comorbidities, risk factors for infectious keratitis, duration of symptoms and characteristics of corneal ulcer. Conclusions: Previous treatment with antibiotics correlates with negative culture results. There was no significant difference in treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients.
abstractGer	Abstract Purpose: To compare clinical-epidemiological profile and treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients. Methods: Patients with suspected infectious keratitis seen at two ophthalmic hospitals in Curitiba, Brazil, between June 2014 and April 2016, were prospectively studied. Ophthalmological exam with corneal scraping and microbiological tests were performed. Data regarding follow up, surgical interventions and treatment outcome were collected after 12 weeks of the first visit trough medical chart review. From the results of the culture, two groups were formed: culture negative keratitis (CNK) and culture positive keratitis (CPK). Results: According to inclusion criteria 21 patients were classified as culture negative keratitis and 20 patients as culture positive keratitis. The number of patients on antibiotic drops at the first visit was greater in CNK group (90.5% versus 60%; p=0.032). Surgical procedures were necessary in 3 patients (15%) in CNK group and in 7 patients (36,8%) in CPK group (p=0.155). Treatment success was achieved by 85% (17/20) of the patients in CNK group and by 61% (11/18) of the patients in CPK group (p=0.144). There was no significant difference between groups regarding age, gender, place of residence, presence of comorbidities, risk factors for infectious keratitis, duration of symptoms and characteristics of corneal ulcer. Conclusions: Previous treatment with antibiotics correlates with negative culture results. There was no significant difference in treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients.
abstract_unstemmed	Abstract Purpose: To compare clinical-epidemiological profile and treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients. Methods: Patients with suspected infectious keratitis seen at two ophthalmic hospitals in Curitiba, Brazil, between June 2014 and April 2016, were prospectively studied. Ophthalmological exam with corneal scraping and microbiological tests were performed. Data regarding follow up, surgical interventions and treatment outcome were collected after 12 weeks of the first visit trough medical chart review. From the results of the culture, two groups were formed: culture negative keratitis (CNK) and culture positive keratitis (CPK). Results: According to inclusion criteria 21 patients were classified as culture negative keratitis and 20 patients as culture positive keratitis. The number of patients on antibiotic drops at the first visit was greater in CNK group (90.5% versus 60%; p=0.032). Surgical procedures were necessary in 3 patients (15%) in CNK group and in 7 patients (36,8%) in CPK group (p=0.155). Treatment success was achieved by 85% (17/20) of the patients in CNK group and by 61% (11/18) of the patients in CPK group (p=0.144). There was no significant difference between groups regarding age, gender, place of residence, presence of comorbidities, risk factors for infectious keratitis, duration of symptoms and characteristics of corneal ulcer. Conclusions: Previous treatment with antibiotics correlates with negative culture results. There was no significant difference in treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	1
title_short	Infectious keratitis in southern Brazil: a comparison culture negative and culture positive patients
url	https://doi.org/10.5935/0034-7280.20200009 https://doaj.org/article/38a8a9436fd846568839e9f390641bff http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-72802020000100046&tlng=en http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbof/v79n1/0034-7280-rbof-79-01-0046.pdf https://doaj.org/toc/1982-8551
remote_bool	true
author2	Guilherme Nardi Becker Guilherme Gubert Muller Felipe Francisco Tuon
author2Str	Guilherme Nardi Becker Guilherme Gubert Muller Felipe Francisco Tuon
ppnlink	56551749X
callnumber-subject	RE - Ophthalmology
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.5935/0034-7280.20200009
callnumber-a	RE1-994
up_date	2024-07-03T21:02:54.779Z
_version_	1803593265835933696
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ014059762</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230502203938.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230226s2020 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.5935/0034-7280.20200009</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ014059762</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ38a8a9436fd846568839e9f390641bff</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield><subfield code="a">spa</subfield><subfield code="a">por</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RE1-994</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Maria Cecília Barros Duarte</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Infectious keratitis in southern Brazil: a comparison culture negative and culture positive patients</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Purpose: To compare clinical-epidemiological profile and treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients. Methods: Patients with suspected infectious keratitis seen at two ophthalmic hospitals in Curitiba, Brazil, between June 2014 and April 2016, were prospectively studied. Ophthalmological exam with corneal scraping and microbiological tests were performed. Data regarding follow up, surgical interventions and treatment outcome were collected after 12 weeks of the first visit trough medical chart review. From the results of the culture, two groups were formed: culture negative keratitis (CNK) and culture positive keratitis (CPK). Results: According to inclusion criteria 21 patients were classified as culture negative keratitis and 20 patients as culture positive keratitis. The number of patients on antibiotic drops at the first visit was greater in CNK group (90.5% versus 60%; p=0.032). Surgical procedures were necessary in 3 patients (15%) in CNK group and in 7 patients (36,8%) in CPK group (p=0.155). Treatment success was achieved by 85% (17/20) of the patients in CNK group and by 61% (11/18) of the patients in CPK group (p=0.144). There was no significant difference between groups regarding age, gender, place of residence, presence of comorbidities, risk factors for infectious keratitis, duration of symptoms and characteristics of corneal ulcer. Conclusions: Previous treatment with antibiotics correlates with negative culture results. There was no significant difference in treatment outcome between culture negative and culture positive keratitis patients.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Infectious keratitis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Microbial keratitis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Corneal ulcer</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Microbial culture</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Antibiotic drops</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Ophthalmology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Guilherme Nardi Becker</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Guilherme Gubert Muller</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Felipe Francisco Tuon</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Revista Brasileira de Oftalmologia</subfield><subfield code="d">Sociedade Brasileira de Oftalmologia, 2008</subfield><subfield code="g">79(2020), 1, Seite 46-52</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)56551749X</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2424259-7</subfield><subfield code="x">19828551</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:79</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2020</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:46-52</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.5935/0034-7280.20200009</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/38a8a9436fd846568839e9f390641bff</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-72802020000100046&tlng=en</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbof/v79n1/0034-7280-rbof-79-01-0046.pdf</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1982-8551</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">79</subfield><subfield code="j">2020</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="h">46-52</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.4018774

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Infectious keratitis in southern Brazil: a comparison culture negative and culture positive patients

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?