Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29133296›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of ophthalmology2018

Comparison of preservation and transportation protocols for preloaded Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty.

Vito Romano, Mohit Parekh, Alessandro Ruzza, Colin E Willoughby, Stefano Ferrari, Diego Ponzin, Stephen B Kaye, Hannah J Levis

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of ophthalmology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Incidence and management of early postoperative complications in lamellar corneal transplantation.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Ultra-thin DSAEK using an innovative artificial anterior chamber pressuriser: a proof-of-concept study.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Corneal Donation: Current Guidelines and Future Direction.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2021
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Vito RomanoDepartment of Ophthalmology, St Paul's Eye Unit, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
Mohit ParekhInternational Center for Ocular Physiopathology, Veneto Eye Bank Foundation, Venice, Italy.
Alessandro RuzzaInternational Center for Ocular Physiopathology, Veneto Eye Bank Foundation, Venice, Italy.
Colin E WilloughbyDepartment of Ophthalmology, St Paul's Eye Unit, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
Stefano FerrariInternational Center for Ocular Physiopathology, Veneto Eye Bank Foundation, Venice, Italy.
Diego PonzinInternational Center for Ocular Physiopathology, Veneto Eye Bank Foundation, Venice, Italy.
Stephen B KayeDepartment of Ophthalmology, St Paul's Eye Unit, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
Hannah J LevisDepartment of Eye and Vision Science, University of Liverpool Institute of Ageing and Chronic Disease, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3923-1178
University of Liverpool · GBVeneto Eye Bank Foundation · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsDescemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) preparation is technically demanding and is a limiting factor for uptake of this kind of surgery. Supply methods that simplify the procedure for surgeons are key to increasing uptake. This study compares two different shipping protocols for DMEK.

methodsAn 8.5 mm DMEK graft was punched, marked and loaded for transportation in two different conditions: (A) endothelium trifolded inwards in organ culture conditions (n=7) and (B) endothelium rolled outwards in hypothermic conditions (n=7). Tissues were shipped from Italy to the UK, then analysed for orientation, endothelial cell density, denuded areas, cell mortality, triple viability staining (Hoechst/ethidium homodimer/calcein AM (HEC)), immunolocalisation of ZO-1 and Na/K-ATPase proteins, visualisation of actin filaments using phalloidin and histological analysis using H&E on paraffin-embedded sections.

resultsAll tissues clearly showed the mark used for graft orientation. After shipping in condition A, there was an increase in cell mortality of 8.1% and in denuded areas of 22.4%, whereas for condition B there was an increase in cell mortality of 14.2% and in denuded areas of 34.3% after shipping. HEC staining revealed areas of viable cells and apoptotic cells, with large denuded areas found in the periphery for condition B and within folds for condition A.

conclusionsPrestripped preloaded DMEK grafts retained sufficient viable cells for transplantation, with condition A (endothelium-in) offering the advantage of greater flexibility of use due to a longer shelf-life. HEC analysis provides further detailed information as to the status of DMEK grafts and should be used in future similar studies.

Indexed as

Descemet Stripping Endothelial KeratoplastyCell CountCell DeathCell SurvivalCorneal Endothelial Cell LossDescemet MembraneEndothelial CellsHumansSpecimen HandlingTissue and Organ HarvestingTissue Preservationcorneadystrophyexperimental laboratorytreatment surgery

Identifiers

PMID29133296
PMCPMC5890643
OpenAlexW2768168925

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.