ArticleThe British journal of ophthalmology2016
Global cell-by-cell evaluation of endothelial viability after two methods of graft preparation in Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty.
Article in The British journal of ophthalmology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Validation of a Deep Learning-Assisted Evaluation of Total Corneal Endothelial Cells Viability.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- Optimized laboratory techniques for assessing the quality of pre-stripped DMEK grafts.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Establishment of an Ex Vivo Human Corneal Endothelium Wound Model.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty Graft Preparation Using the Liquid Bubble Technique with Subtrabecular Hydrodissection: A Retrospective Real-Life Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Clinical outcome analysis of two approaches to trypan blue dyeing for DMEK.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Preoperative surgeon evaluation of corneal endothelial status: the Viability Control of Human Endothelial Cells before Keratoplasty (V-CHECK) study protocol.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Near infra-red labelling and tracking of corneal endothelial cells in-vivo.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Surface quality and endothelial cell viability after femtosecond laser-assisted donor lenticule preparation for endothelial keratoplasty - AnIndian journal of ophthalmology · 2020Article
- Real-time assessment of corneal endothelial cell damage following graft preparation and donor insertion for DMEK.PloS one · 2017Article
- Organ culture storage of pre-prepared corneal donor material for Descemet's membrane endothelial keratoplasty.The British journal of ophthalmology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo describe a novel method of global cell viability assessment for Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) and the comparison of two contemporary methods of donor tissue preparation.
methodsDMEK transplants were prepared using two different methods: liquid bubble separation and manual peeling (n=8 each group). Samples were incubated with Hoechst, calcein-AM and ethidium homodimer prior to mounting on a curved imaging chamber. Z-stacked fluorescence microscopy images were combined to produce an in-focus global image capable of resolving all cell nuclei. Image processing software was used to define a calcein-positive live cell area, count all cell nuclei within this area and subtract ethidium-positive dead cells to derive the total viable endothelial cell count. Corrected global cell density was calculated by dividing the number of viable cells by the graft area, which had been corrected for imaging a curved surface.
resultsCorrected global cell density was lower than the central endothelial cell density in both groups: 85.5% of the pre-preparation central endothelial cell density in the peel group and 75.8% in the bubble group. Corrected global cell density was significantly lower in the liquid bubble separation group than in the peel group (p=0.04).
conclusionsEye bank estimations of central endothelial cell density overestimate true cell density after graft preparation in DMEK. A peel method is less damaging and more consistent than a liquid bubble method. Cell loss correlated strongly with the degree of stromal hydration prior to bubble separation in the liquid bubble group.
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.