ReviewMedical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal2019
Diagnosis and Management of Pseudoguttata: A Literature Review.
Review in Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The soil and the seed: The relationship between Descemet's membrane and the corneal endothelium.Experimental eye research · 2023Review
- Diseases of the corneal endothelium.Experimental eye research · 2021Review
- A Glossary for ''Pseudo'' Conditions in Ophthalmology.Beyoglu eye journal · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Corneal pseudoguttata (PG), also known as pseudoguttae or secondary guttata, is a transient, reversible endothelial edema commonly associated with anterior segment pathology. While considered rare, PG presents on slit-lamp examination more commonly than originally thought. We have clinically observed PG after refractive surgeries, in association with infectious keratitis, and following medication use. PG presents as dark lesions on slit-lamp exam with specular illumination, similar to primary corneal guttata. PG is distinct from guttata because PG resolves over time and does not involve Descemet's membrane. Other ocular findings that may be confused with guttata include endothelial blebs (EB) and endothelial denudation (ED). EB are possibly a type of PG that present after contact lens use or hypoxia. ED is a distinct entity that is characterized by loss of endothelial cells without involvement of Descemet's membrane. Confocal microscopy may be useful in differentiating these four endothelial lesions, with differences in border definition and the presence of hyperreflective areas two main distinctions. PG presents as a hyporeflective, elevated shape without clear borders on confocal microscopy. PG, EB, and ED can resolve with time without the need for surgical intervention, unlike corneal guttata. Treatment of the underlying condition will lead to resolution of both PG and EB.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31598518PMC6778462What 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.