Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27596140›Full record

ArticleBMC ophthalmology2016

The effects of oral and topical corticosteroid in rabbit corneas.

Kaoru Araki-Sasaki, Osamu Katsuta, Hidetoshi Mano, Takashi Nagano, Masatsugu Nakamura

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Dry Eye Disease: What Is the Role of Vitamin D?International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The Immunological Basis of Dry Eye Disease and Current Topical Treatment Options.Journal of ocular pharmacology and therapeutics : the official journal of the Association for Ocular Pharmacology and Therapeutics · 2020
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Peripheral Ulcerative Keratitis: A Review.Journal of ophthalmic & vision research
    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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kaoru Araki-SasakiDepartment of Ophthalmology, Japan Community Health Care Organization, Hoshigaoka Medical Center, 4-8-1, Hoshigaoka, Hirakata city, Osaka, 5738511, Japan. sasakis@sa2.so-net.ne.jp.
Osamu KatsutaResearch and Development Division, Santen Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., 8916-16, Takayama-cho, Ikoma city, Nara, 6300101, Japan.
Hidetoshi ManoResearch and Development Division, Santen Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., 8916-16, Takayama-cho, Ikoma city, Nara, 6300101, Japan.
Takashi NaganoResearch and Development Division, Santen Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., 8916-16, Takayama-cho, Ikoma city, Nara, 6300101, Japan.
Masatsugu NakamuraResearch and Development Division, Santen Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., 8916-16, Takayama-cho, Ikoma city, Nara, 6300101, Japan.
Santen (Japan) · JPHoshigaoka Medical Center · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo determine the most effective route of administration of corticosteroids in the treatment of ocular surface disease, by characterizing the difference between oral prednisolone and topical dexamethasone administration using an animal model.

methodsPharmacokinetic analyses determined the corticosteroid concentrations in the normal ocular tissues of rabbits after oral or topical administration of corticosteroids using LC-MS/MS. In wound healing analyses, the area of the epithelial defect created by keratectomy using a 6-mm trephine was calculated with an image analyzer using an orally or topically steroid-administrated animal model. The average size of basal epithelial cells, the frequency of mitotic basal epithelial cells, the number of squamous cells, and the number of hypertrophic stromal fibroblasts were determined in the enucleated corneal tissues after wound closure.

resultsBy slit lamp examination, no remarkable differences were observed between orally and topically administered groups. Pharmacokinetic analyses showed that the distribution of dexamethasone after topical administration was superior to that after oral administration in the cornea. In contrast, both concentrations of corticosteroid applied topically and orally were similar with regards to AUCs (area under the concentration-time curve) in the conjunctiva. Although the healing rate was slower in the topical group, all corneas were almost healed within 96 h in the wound healing analysis. According to the histological analyses of epithelial cells, the average basal cell size was larger, the frequency of mitotic basal cells was greater, and the number of squamous epithelial cell layers was lower in the topically administered group although all of these differences were with no statistical significance. However, the number of hypertrophic stromal fibroblasts in the topically administered group was significantly lower than that in the orally administered group.

conclusionsThere are different distributions and effects between orally and topically administered corticosteroids on the ocular surface. The data may provide the useful information in selecting the appropriate route of corticosteroid application for the treatment of ocular surface disease.

Indexed as

Administration, TopicalAnimalsCorneaCorneal InjuriesCorneal StromaDexamethasoneDisease Models, AnimalEpithelial CellsFibroblastsGlucocorticoidsPrednisoloneRabbitsTandem Mass SpectrometryWound HealingDexamethasoneGlucocorticoidsPrednisoloneCorneaCorticosteroidKeratitisPharmacokineticsWound healing

Identifiers

PMID27596140
PMCPMC5011848
OpenAlexW2514497641

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.