Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21689649›Full record

ReviewExperimental eye research2012

Graft survival and endothelial outcomes in the new era of endothelial keratoplasty.

Sanjay V Patel

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Experimental eye research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 94 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Long-Term Endothelial Outcomes and Dislocation Risks in Small Versus Large Grafts for Descemet's Stripping Endothelial Keratoplasty.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Current Perspectives on Corneal Transplantation.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sanjay V PatelDepartment of Ophthalmology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St. SW, Rochester, MN 55905, USA. patel.sanjay@mayo.edu
Mayo Clinic · US

Funding

Corneal Endothelial Cell TransplantationR21EY019339 · NEI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI PATEL, SANJAY V · 2009 to 2010
$416k
NEI NIH HHS EY 19339NEI NIH HHS R21 EY019339
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Corneal endothelial cells do not proliferative in vivo sufficiently to enable endothelial regeneration, and thus diseases of the corneal endothelium, which cause poor vision and discomfort, require treatment by transplantation of cadaveric donor corneal endothelial cells. The two major goals of any corneal transplant procedure are to restore vision and to promote longevity of the donor cornea by maintaining a healthy donor endothelial cell density. Over the last decade, the surgical treatment for endothelial disease has rapidly evolved toward endothelial keratoplasty, or selective tissue transplantation, and away from full-thickness penetrating keratoplasty (PK). While endothelial keratoplasty offers distinct advantages over PK in terms of visual outcomes and a smaller incision, the new surgical manipulations of the fragile donor tissue cause significant donor endothelial cell trauma. As a result, donor endothelial cell loss is much higher during the first month after Descemet stripping endothelial keratoplasty (DSEK) compared to after PK, and the primary (or more appropriately, iatrogenic) graft failure rate of 5% remains unacceptably high. Nevertheless, the rate of endothelial cell loss rapidly decreases beyond 6 months after DSEK, and thus endothelial cell loss at 5 years after DSEK appears to be lower than that at 5 years after PK. In the absence of primary (iatrogenic) graft failure, graft survival through 5 years after DSEK is similar to that after PK. Given the promising longer-term endothelial outcomes of DSEK, the quest for optimizing the visual outcomes has spurred interest in Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK). While early results after DMEK suggest better visual outcomes than after DSEK, the technique needs to be simplified, and longer-term outcomes must show an advantage over DSEK with respect to vision, endothelial cell loss, and graft survival. DMEK also has a high rate of primary (iatrogenic) graft failure, and additional donor tissue wastage occurs when preparation of DMEK grafts is unsuccessful. This review discusses endothelial keratoplasty techniques and the associated endothelial outcomes.

Indexed as

Descemet Stripping Endothelial KeratoplastyGraft SurvivalAnimalsCell SurvivalCorneaCorneal DiseasesEndothelial CellsHumansKeratoplasty, PenetratingRecovery of FunctionTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeVascular System InjuriesVision, Ocular

Identifiers

PMID21689649
PMCPMC3902807
OpenAlexW1984943382

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.