Evidence Hub

Emerging zoonotic ocular sporotrichosis in southeast Asia: a case series from Thailand and systematic review of regional reports

Reinprayoon U, Wannapanich T, Assavapongpaiboon B, Kasetsuwan N, Kittipibul T, Tirakunwichcha S, Chindamporn A, Langsiri N

Journal of ophthalmic inflammation and infection, 2026

23 participants

Abstract

Background: To describe the clinical features, diagnostic approaches, and treatment outcomes of ocular sporotrichosis through an institutional case series and systematic review of reports from Southeast Asia.

Methods: Five patients diagnosed with ocular sporotrichosis at a tertiary referral center in Thailand (2020-2024) were retrospectively reviewed for clinical presentation, diagnostic confirmation, and treatment outcomes. A systematic review of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and MEDLINE (last searched March 20, 2025) identified published cases from Southeast Asia. Eligible reports were narratively synthesized; no meta-analysis was performed due to clinical heterogeneity.

Results: All five institutional cases presented with chronic granulomatous conjunctivitis, frequently associated with cat exposure. Diagnosis was confirmed by fungal culture and/or histopathology in all patients. Oral itraconazole was prescribed in every case, with adjunctive topical antifungals used selectively. Most patients improved clinically, though several were lost to follow-up. The systematic review included 12 studies comprising 23 patients reported between 2018 and 2024. The median age was 32 years (IQR 22.5-55.0), and 78.3% were female. Most cases were unilateral (91.3%), with microbiological confirmation in 87%. Oral itraconazole was the primary treatment, with topical or intralesional antifungals in some cases. Clinical outcomes were generally favorable, though one patient developed limbal stem cell…

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. Reported size: 23 participants or records.

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