ArticleEye (London, England)2013
What does the future hold for the treatment of Fuchs endothelial dystrophy; will 'keratoplasty' still be a valid procedure?
Article in Eye (London, England), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Review
- New Horizons in the Treatment of Corneal Endothelial Dysfunction.Journal of ophthalmology · 2021Review
- Corneal injury: Clinical and molecular aspects.Experimental eye research · 2019Review
- Corneal clearance and central endothelial cell repopulation despite graft detachment after Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty.GMS ophthalmology cases · 2019Article
- A mathematical model to predict endothelial cell density following penetrating keratoplasty with selective dropout from graft failure.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2014Article
- Fuchs fuchs Fuch's and Fuchs'!Eye (London, England) · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (FECD) is a well recognized corneal disorder characterized by the presence of collagenous warts extending from Descemet membrane (guttae) and endothelial cellular dysfunction due to cell loss and/or degeneration. Because of the characteristic abnormal cell morphology as seen with specular microscopy as well as the limited regenerative capacity in vivo, the endothelial cells were considered to be 'dystrophic'. Hence, FECD is commonly managed by replacement of the endothelium with donor tissue by means of a penetrating or endothelial keratoplasty. The latter procedure has now been refined to the isolated transplantation of a donor Descemet membrane and its endothelium, referred to as Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK). Unexpectedly, clinical observation made after DMEK seemed to challenge the current concept of the state of the endothelium in FECD; we actually observed an important role for the 'dystrophic' host endothelium in re-endothelialization of the denuded DM, and subsequent corneal clearance. In addition, recent studies regarding the pathophysiology of FECD made us realize that the endothelial cells are not 'dystrophic' per se, but in the course of time may have acquired a dysfunction instead. This paper describes the rationale behind this new concept and based on this, discusses the possibilities for future, less invasive treatment modalities for FECD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.