Evidence Hub

A systemic review of the utility of antituberculosis therapy for presumed tuberculous uveitis

Taylor JW, Wright GEL, Lim LL, Denholm JT

BMC infectious diseases, 2025

4 citations

Abstract

Background: Uveitis presumed to be secondary to Mycobacterium tuberculosis is a rare but potentially blinding condition. Difficulty in making an accurate diagnosis and the low incidence of TB uveitis (TBU) contribute to the lack of evidence regarding the best management of this condition. This systematic review aims to analyse existing research to provide a summary of the literature regarding the utility of TB therapy for the management of TBU.

Methods: This systematic review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (PROSPERO 2021 CRD42021273379). We searched Medline, Embase and Central databases, and the search was done on 20th June 2023 with an updated literature search.

Results: We included 55 studies and found that the heterogeneity in the methodology of these studies precluded metanalysis, and a narrative analysis was undertaken. Risk of bias analysis was undertaken using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.

Conclusions: Key findings of this systematic review include multiple systemic biases in the available evidence, and general lack of control for confounding variables. This results in many unanswered questions regarding the utility of TB therapy for TBU and reinforces the need for more data in this area.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free