Trial reportIndian journal of ophthalmology2019
Microkeratome-assisted ultrathin Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty: A randomized trial comparing single-pass versus double-pass technique.
Trial report in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Ultrathin Descemet Stripping Automated Endothelial Keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK) versus Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty (DMEK)-a systematic review and meta-analysis.Eye (London, England) · 2023Pooled it
- Current concepts and recent trends in endothelial keratoplasty.World journal of transplantation · 2025Review
- Article
- Commentary: Ultrathin Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2019Article
- Commentary: Microkeratome-assisted ultrathin Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the outcomes of two techniques, for preparation of microkeratome-assisted ultrathin grafts for Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK). Methods: The study involved 20 eyes of 20 patients with pseudophakic bullous keratopathy, randomized into two groups. Group 1 eyes underwent microkeratome-assisted DSAEK using the single-pass technique for lenticule preparation, whereas group 2 eyes underwent microkeratome-assisted DSAEK using the double-pass technique. Patients were followed up till 6 months, postoperatively. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at final follow-up was considered as the primary outcome measure, whereas graft thickness (GT) contrast sensitivity and endothelial cell loss were considered as the secondary outcome measures. A P value of <0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Results: Baseline characteristics of two groups were comparable. The mean central GT was comparable in both groups at 6 months follow-up [group 1: 98 ± 24.46 μm, group 2: 129 ± 31.46 μm (P = 0.18)]. Both groups fared equally in terms of BCVA (P = 0.33). Contrast sensitivity was significantly better in group 1 eyes (P = 0.045). A statistically significant negative correlation was found between postoperative BCVA and postoperative GT (R = -0.728, P = 0.016). The percentage endothelial cell loss was slightly higher in group 2 eyes, although not statistically significant. Two eyes in group 2 experienced complications during lenticule preparation. None of the eye experienced any complication in the postoperative period. Conclusion: Both techniques provided grafts with comparable thickness and endothelial cell loss and were associated with comparable BCVA, at final follow-up visit. The contrast sensitivity was, however, better in eyes receiving grafts prepared with the single-pass technique.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.