ArticleBMC ophthalmology2020
Effect of corneal cross-linking on endothelial cell density and morphology in the peripheral cornea.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Corneal endothelial morphology in patients with herpetic keratitis attending tertiary eye centre.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Outcome of accelerated corneal cross-linking with 0.25% riboflavin in progressive keratoconus patients.International ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Individual Risk Assessment and Prognostication of Outcomes After Corneal Cross-Linking.Journal of ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Article
- Pediatric Crosslinking: Current Protocols and Approach.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo compare the endothelial cell density and morphology in the peripheral cornea before and after corneal cross-linking (CXL).
methodsThis study evaluated thirty-one eyes of 31 patients who were treated with standard CXL for progressive keratoconus. Preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively, we compared the corneal endothelial cell density (ECD), the coefficient of variation in cell size (CV), and the percentage of hexagonal cells (HEX), in the peripheral regions of the cornea, using a non-contact specular microscope (EM-3000, Tomey).
resultsAll keratoconic eyes in this series were measurable in the peripheral regions. No significant differences were found in the peripheral ECD preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively at each point (Wilcoxon signed-rank test, superior, p = 0.16, nasal superior, p = 0.12, temporal superior, p = 0.17, inferior, p = 0.37, nasal inferior, p = 0.28, temporal inferior, p = 0.17). The mean percentage of the ECD loss was 1.3, 1.3, 1.0, 1.4, 0.7, and 1.4%, respectively. No significant differences in the peripheral CV or HEX were found preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively at each point.
conclusionsStandard CXL does not cause significant changes in endothelial cell density, polymegethism, or polymorphism, in the peripheral regions of the cornea. It is suggested that CXL is a minimally invasive surgical approach for progressive keratoconus, even in terms of peripheral endothelial cells.
trial registrationUniversity Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trial Registry (000031162).
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.