ReviewInternational ophthalmology2021
Indications, surgical procedures and outcomes of keratoplasty at a Tertiary University-based hospital: a review of 10 years' experience.
Review in International ophthalmology, 2021. 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.
- Outcomes of Therapeutic and Tectonic Penetrating Keratoplasty for Advanced Corneal Disease.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Five Year Review of All Examined Corneal Tissue in a Tertiary Eye Care Center: Demographics and Surgical Indications.Journal of epidemiology and global health · 2024Article
- Comparison of clinical outcomes, complications and patient satisfaction following deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty and penetrating keratoplasty.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Corneal blindness in the developing world: The role of prevention strategies.F1000Research · 2023Article
- Incidence of Complications Related to Corneal Graft in a Group of 758 Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate keratoplasty outcomes in a university-based hospital.
methodsMedical records of all patients undergoing keratoplasty at King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2015, with a minimum follow-up period of three months were reviewed retrospectively. Indications, surgical procedures, complications and outcomes of all surgeries were collected and analyzed.
main outcome measuresGraft survival and visual acuity.
resultsData were available for 488 grafts in the study period, including 313 optical penetrating keratoplasty (PKP), 42 therapeutic/tectonic PKPs, 72 deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty, 58 Descemet's stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty and 3 Descemet's membrane endothelial keratoplasty. A total of 389 (79.7%) grafts survived, whereas 99 (20.3%) grafts failed. The projected 1-year, 3-year and 5-year cumulative survival rates for the entire study group were 85.8%, 74.9% and 71.1%, respectively. Corneal ectasia was the commonest surgical indication accounting for 48% of the cases. The best long-term survival rates were observed in the stromal dystrophy and corneal ectasia groups. The worst survival rates were noticed in the congenital corneal opacities group. Vision improved in in 57.5% of grafted eyes, remained the same in 39.8% and deteriorated in 2.7%. Postoperative complications occurred in 36% of the grafts with rejection being the most common, and its mere occurrence increased the risk of graft failure by 20-fold.
conclusionThe outcome of grafting in a university-based hospital can be excellent in low-risk grafts and fair to low in high-risk grafts. Our results are relatively comparable to nationally and internationally reported outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33625652What 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.