Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25276786›Full record

ArticleBioMed research international2014

Imaging mass spectrometry by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization and stress-strain measurements in iontophoresis transepithelial corneal collagen cross-linking.

Paolo Vinciguerra, Rita Mencucci, Vito Romano, Eberhard Spoerl, Fabrizio I Camesasca, Eleonora Favuzza, Claudio Azzolini, Rodolfo Mastropasqua, Riccardo Vinciguerra

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BioMed research international, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Editorial: Imaging in Ophthalmology.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Biomechanics of Ophthalmic Crosslinking.Translational vision science & technology · 2021
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
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

9 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Paolo VinciguerraHumanitas Clinical and Research Center, Via Manzoni 56, Rozzano, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-3864-8246
Rita MencucciDepartment of Surgery and Translational Medicine, Eye Clinic, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Vito RomanoDepartment of Ophthalmology, Second University of Naples, Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5148-7643
Eberhard SpoerlUniversity Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3229-3795
Fabrizio I CamesascaHumanitas Clinical and Research Center, Via Manzoni 56, Rozzano, Italy.
Eleonora FavuzzaDepartment of Surgery and Translational Medicine, Eye Clinic, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Claudio AzzoliniDepartment of Surgical and Morphological Sciences, Section of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine, University of Insubria, Via Guicciardini 9, Varese, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1334-0974
Rodolfo MastropasquaOphthalmology Unit, Department of Neurological Neuropsychological, Morphological and Movement Sciences, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1541-4735
Riccardo VinciguerraHumanitas Clinical and Research Center, Via Manzoni 56, Rozzano, Italy ; Department of Surgical and Morphological Sciences, Section of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine, University of Insubria, Via Guicciardini 9, Varese, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2280-9981
Humanitas University · ITUniversity of Florence · ITUniversity of Insubria · ITUniversity Hospital Carl Gustav Carus · DEUniversity of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" · ITUniversity of Verona · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare biomechanical effect, riboflavin penetration and distribution in transepithelial corneal collagen cross-linking with iontophoresis (I-CXL), with standard cross linking (S-CXL) and current transepithelial protocol (TE-CXL). MATERIALS AND

methodsThe study was divided into two different sections, considering, respectively, rabbit and human cadaver corneas. In both sections corneas were divided according to imbibition protocols and irradiation power. Imaging mass spectrometry by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization (MALDI-IMS) and stress-strain measurements were used. Forty-eight rabbit and twelve human cadaver corneas were evaluated.

resultsMALDI-IMS showed a deep riboflavin penetration throughout the corneal layers with I-CXL, with a roughly lower concentration in the deepest layers when compared to S-CXL, whereas with TE-CXL penetration was considerably less. In rabbits, there was a significant increase (by 71.9% and P = 0.05) in corneal rigidity after I-CXL, when compared to controls. In humans, corneal rigidity increase was not significantly different among the subgroups.

conclusionsIn rabbits, I-CXL induced a significant increase in corneal stiffness as well as better riboflavin penetration when compared to controls and TE-CXL but not to S-CXL. Stress-strain in human corneas did not show significant differences among techniques, possibly because of the small sample size of groups. In conclusion, I-CXL could be a valid alternative to S-CXL for riboflavin delivery in CXL, preserving the epithelium.

Indexed as

Imaging, Three-DimensionalIontophoresisStress, MechanicalAnimalsBiomechanical PhenomenaCollagenCross-Linking ReagentsElastic ModulusEpithelium, CornealHumansRabbitsRiboflavinSpectrometry, Mass, Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption-IonizationTissue DonorsCollagenCross-Linking ReagentsRiboflavin

Identifiers

PMID25276786
PMCPMC4167647
OpenAlexW2097924500

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.