ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2021
Peripheral-to-central ratio of Guttae: validity and reliability of an objective method to characterize severity of Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy.
Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
Abstract
purposeCommon methods of measuring severity of Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (FECD) are limited in objectivity, reliability, or start with a variable baseline that prevents distinguishing healthy from affected eyes. The aim of this study was to describe a method of grading FECD that overcomes these limitations.
methodsFifteen patients with Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy were included in the study. Guttae were imaged with a slit lamp beam 8 mm tall; the bottom 4 mm half of each image was divided into two equally-sized sections. Guttae were counted by four independent graders blinded to disease severity scores. The peripheral:central guttae ratio was compared to modified Krachmer clinical severity scores. The peripheral:central guttae ratio was compared between mild (severity 0.5-3) versus moderate-to-severe (severity 4-5) disease. Receiver operating characteristics defined optimal ratio cutoffs for mild versus moderate-to-severe disease.
resultsIncreased peripheral guttae and peripheral:central guttae ratio correlated with Krachmer severity (p = 0.021 and p = 0.009, respectively). The difference between mild and moderate-to-severe cases for the peripheral:central guttae ratio was significant (p < 0.001). Inter-rater reliability of total guttae count was high (coefficient = 0.82, p < 0.001). A peripheral:central guttae ratio of 0.16 was the ideal cut-off point (area under the curve = 0.79, sensitivity = 0.78, and specificity = 0.80).
conclusionIn this pilot study, the peripheral:central ratio of guttae correlates with subjective clinical severity of Fuchs dystrophy. It starts at a common baseline, has good inter-rater reliability, does not require dilation, and can be conducted with a smartphone and slit-lamp.
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.