Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29535566›Full record

ArticleExperimental neurobiology2018

Functional Analysis and Immunochemical Analyses of Ca

Ji-Yeon Lee, Su-Ja Oh

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental neurobiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ji-Yeon LeeDepartment of Anatomy, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul 06591, Korea.
Su-Ja OhDepartment of Anatomy, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul 06591, Korea.
Catholic University of Korea · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The retinal degeneration resulting from elevated intraocular pressure was evaluated through functional and morphological analyses, for better understanding of the pathophysiology of glaucoma. Ocular hypertension was induced via unilateral episcleral venous cauterization in rats. Experimental time was set at 1 and 3 days, and 1, 2, 4, and 8 weeks post-operation. Retinal function was analyzed using electroretinography. For morphological analysis, retinal tissues were processed for immunochemistry by using antibodies against the calcium-sensing receptor and calcium-binding proteins. Apoptosis was analyzed using the TUNEL method and electron microscopy. Amplitudes of a- and b-wave in scotopic and photopic responses were found to be reduced in all glaucomatous retinas. Photopic negative response for ganglion cell function significantly reduced from 1-day and more significantly reduced in 2-week glaucoma. Calcium-sensing receptor immunoreactivity in ganglion cells remarkably reduced at 8 weeks; conversely, protein amounts increased significantly. Calcium-binding proteins immunoreactivity in amacrine cells clearly reduced at 8 weeks, despite of uneven changes in protein amounts. Apoptosis appeared in both photoreceptors and ganglion cells in 8-week glaucomatous retina. Apoptotic feature of photoreceptors was typical, whereas that of ganglion cells was necrotic in nature. These findings suggest that elevated intraocular pressure affects the sensitivity of photoreceptors and retinal ganglion cells, and leads to apoptotic death. The calcium-sensing receptor may be a useful detector for alteration of extracellular calcium levels surrounding the ganglion cells.

Indexed as

apoptosisCa2+-sensing receptorelectroretinographyglaucomaratsretinal ganglion cell

Identifiers

PMID29535566
PMCPMC5840458
OpenAlexW2789413009

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.