Observational studyCell and tissue banking2021
Gender medicine in corneal transplantation: influence of sex mismatch on rejection episodes and graft survival in a prospective cohort of patients.
Observational study in Cell and tissue banking, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of donor-recipient gender mismatch on outcomes in Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK).Cell and tissue banking · 2026Article
- Machine learning methods to identify risk factors for corneal graft rejection in keratoconus.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Donor and Recipient Sex Matching and Corneal Graft Failure in High-Risk and Non-High-Risk Patients.Journal of ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Impact of gender mismatch on corneal graft rejection and rejection-related graft failure in repeat penetrating keratoplasty.PloS one · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
To evaluate the effect of donor-to-recipient sex mismatched (male donor corneas to female recipients) on the incidence of rejection episodes and failures up to 1 year after corneal transplantation. Prospective observational cohort study, with donor corneas randomly assigned and surgeons blind to the sex of donor. A unique eye bank retrieved and selected the donor corneas transplanted in 4 ophthalmic units in patients with clinical indication for primary or repeated keratoplasty for optical reasons, perforating or lamellar, either anterior or posterior. Rejection episode defined as any reversible or irreversible endothelial, epithelial or stromal sign, with or without development of corneal edema, and graft failure as a permanently cloudy graft or a regraft for any reason detected or acknowledged during a postoperative ophthalmic visit at any time up to 1 year after surgery were recorded.156 (28.6%) patients resulted donor-to-recipient gender mismatched for H-Y antigen (male donor to female recipient). During the 12 months follow-up, 83 (14.7%, 95% CI 12.0-17.9) grafts showed at least 1 rejection episode and 17 (3.2%, 95% CI 2.0-5.0) failed after immune rejection, among 54 (9.6%, 95% CI 7.4-12.3) grafts failed for all causes. No significant differences between matched and mismatched patients were found for cumulative incidence of both rejection episodes (15.2% and 13.5%) and graft failures following rejection (3.2% and 2.6%), respectively. Multivariable analyses showed that H-Y matching either is not a predictive factor for rejection or graft failure nor seems to influence incidence of failures on respect to patient's risk category. The lack of influence of donor-to-recipient mismatched on the rate of rejections and graft failures resulting from this study do not support the adoption of donor-recipient matching in the allocation of corneas for transplantation.
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.