Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28315339›Full record

ArticleExperimental eye research2017

Elastic microfibril distribution in the cornea: Differences between normal and keratoconic stroma.

Tomas L White, Philip N Lewis, Robert D Young, Koji Kitazawa, Tsutomu Inatomi, Shigeru Kinoshita, Keith M Meek

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental eye research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
7.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Clinical anatomy: cornea and ocular surface.Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal · 2025
    Review
  12. Keratoconus.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Tomas L WhiteStructural Biophysics Research Group, School of Optometry and Vision Sciences, Cardiff University, Maindy Road, Cardiff CF24 4HQ, UK.
Philip N LewisStructural Biophysics Research Group, School of Optometry and Vision Sciences, Cardiff University, Maindy Road, Cardiff CF24 4HQ, UK.
Robert D YoungStructural Biophysics Research Group, School of Optometry and Vision Sciences, Cardiff University, Maindy Road, Cardiff CF24 4HQ, UK.
Koji KitazawaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Kyoto Prefectural University, Kyoto, Japan; Department of Frontier Medical Science and Technology for Ophthalmology, Kyoto Prefectural University, Kyoto, Japan.
Tsutomu InatomiDepartment of Ophthalmology, Kyoto Prefectural University, Kyoto, Japan.
Shigeru KinoshitaDepartment of Frontier Medical Science and Technology for Ophthalmology, Kyoto Prefectural University, Kyoto, Japan.
Keith M MeekStructural Biophysics Research Group, School of Optometry and Vision Sciences, Cardiff University, Maindy Road, Cardiff CF24 4HQ, UK. Electronic address: meekkm@cardiff.ac.uk.
Cardiff University · GBKyoto Prefectural University · JP

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/M025349/1Medical Research Council MR/K000837/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The optical and biomechanical properties of the cornea are largely governed by the collagen-rich stroma, a layer that represents approximately 90% of the total thickness. Within the stroma, the specific arrangement of superimposed lamellae provides the tissue with tensile strength, whilst the spatial arrangement of individual collagen fibrils within the lamellae confers transparency. In keratoconus, this precise stromal arrangement is lost, resulting in ectasia and visual impairment. In the normal cornea, we previously characterised the three-dimensional arrangement of an elastic fiber network spanning the posterior stroma from limbus-to-limbus. In the peripheral cornea/limbus there are elastin-containing sheets or broad fibers, most of which become microfibril bundles (MBs) with little or no elastin component when reaching the central cornea. The purpose of the current study was to compare this network with the elastic fiber distribution in post-surgical keratoconic corneal buttons, using serial block face scanning electron microscopy and transmission electron microscopy. We have demonstrated that the MB distribution is very different in keratoconus. MBs are absent from a region of stroma anterior to Descemet's membrane, an area that is densely populated in normal cornea, whilst being concentrated below the epithelium, an area in which they are absent in normal cornea. We contend that these latter microfibrils are produced as a biomechanical response to provide additional strength to the anterior stroma in order to prevent tissue rupture at the apex of the cone. A lack of MBs anterior to Descemet's membrane in keratoconus would alter the biomechanical properties of the tissue, potentially contributing to the pathogenesis of the disease.

Indexed as

AdultAgedCorneal StromaElasticityExtracellular MatrixFemaleHumansKeratoconusMaleMicrofibrilsMicroscopy, ConfocalMicroscopy, Electron, ScanningMiddle AgedCorneaElastic fibersFibrillinKeratoconusMicrofibrils

Identifiers

PMID28315339
PMCPMC5451143
OpenAlexW2603759820

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.