ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2020
Changing trends in penetrating keratoplasty indications at a tertiary eye care center in Budapest, Hungary between 2006 and 2017.
Article in International journal of ophthalmology, 2020. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo analyze the changing trends in penetrating keratoplasty (PKP) indications.
methodsThis retrospective study included all patients with PKP between 2006 and 2017. Patients were classified using histological diagnoses. Our groups were as the following: pseudophakic or aphakic bullous keratopathy, regraft, acute necrotizing and ulcerative keratitis, keratoconus, Fuchs' dystrophy, corneal dystrophy other than Fuchs', corneal scar, other diagnoses and failed endothelial keratoplasty graft. Additionally, two different time-periods (2006-2012 and 2013-2017) were analysed.
resultsTotally 1721 histological analyses of 1214 patients were available for review. The diagnoses were pseudophakic or aphakic bullous keratopathy in 487 (28.3%), regraft in 443 (25.7%), acute necrotizing and ulcerative keratitis in 313 (18.2%), corneal scar in 153 (8.9%), keratoconus in 140 (8.1%). Fuchs' dystrophy in 61 (3.5%), corneal dystrophy other than Fuchs' in 46 (2.7%), other diagnoses in 44 (2.6%) and failed endothelial keratoplasty graft in 34 (2.0%) cases. From the first to the second analysed time-period, incidence of acute necrotizing and ulcerative keratitis, corneal scar, Fuchs' dystrophy increased (
conclusionPseudophakic or aphakic bullous keratopathy is the leading indication for PKP, followed by regraft and acute necrotizing and ulcerative keratitis.
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.