Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31245365›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2019

Corneal Repair and Regeneration: Current Concepts and Future Directions.

Mohammadmahdi Mobaraki, Reza Abbasi, Sajjad Omidian Vandchali, Maryam Ghaffari, Fathollah Moztarzadeh, Masoud Mozafari

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 91 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
91citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
15.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

91 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 164 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Diabetic keratopathy and nuclear proteins (Review).Molecular medicine reports · 2026
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Biomaterials for Corneal Regeneration.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review

31 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mohammadmahdi MobarakiBiomaterials Group, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.
Reza AbbasiBiomaterials Group, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.
Sajjad Omidian VandchaliBiomaterials Group, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.
Maryam GhaffariBiomaterials Group, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.
Fathollah MoztarzadehBiomaterials Group, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.
Masoud MozafariDepartment of Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine, Faculty of Advanced Technologies in Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Amirkabir University of Technology · IRIran University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The cornea is a unique tissue and the most powerful focusing element of the eye, known as a window to the eye. Infectious or non-infectious diseases might cause severe visual impairments that need medical intervention to restore patients' vision. The most prominent characteristics of the cornea are its mechanical strength and transparency, which are indeed the most important criteria considerations when reconstructing the injured cornea. Corneal strength comes from about 200 collagen lamellae which criss-cross the cornea in different directions and comprise nearly 90% of the thickness of the cornea. Regarding corneal transparency, the specific characteristics of the cornea include its immune and angiogenic privilege besides its limbus zone. On the other hand, angiogenic privilege involves several active cascades in which anti-angiogenic factors are produced to compensate for the enhanced production of proangiogenic factors after wound healing. Limbus of the cornea forms a border between the corneal and conjunctival epithelium, and its limbal stem cells (LSCs) are essential in maintenance and repair of the adult cornea through its support of corneal epithelial tissue repair and regeneration. As a result, the main factors which threaten the corneal clarity are inflammatory reactions, neovascularization, and limbal deficiency. In fact, the influx of inflammatory cells causes scar formation and destruction of the limbus zone. Current studies about wound healing treatment focus on corneal characteristics such as the immune response, angiogenesis, and cell signaling. In this review, studied topics related to wound healing and new approaches in cornea regeneration, which are mostly related to the criteria mentioned above, will be discussed.

Indexed as

angiogenesisbiomaterialscorneaimmune privilegelimbusregenerative medicinetissue engineeringwound healing

Identifiers

PMID31245365
PMCPMC6579817
OpenAlexW2951259883

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.