Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33864578›Full record

ArticleInternational ophthalmology2021

Amniotic membrane extract eye drops for ocular surface diseases: use and clinical outcome in real-world practice.

Noelia Sabater-Cruz, Marc Figueras-Roca, Miriam Ferrán-Fuertes, Elba Agustí, Eva M Martínez-Conesa, María Luisa Pérez-Rodríguez, Anna Vilarrodona, Ricardo P Casaroli-Marano, AMEED Study Group

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Noelia Sabater-CruzHospital Clinic de Barcelona, Institut Clinic D'Oftalmologia (ICOF), Sabino de Arana s/n, 08028, Barcelona, Spain. Noelia.sabater@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3700-602X
Marc Figueras-RocaHospital Clinic de Barcelona, Institut Clinic D'Oftalmologia (ICOF), Sabino de Arana s/n, 08028, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0548-0539
Miriam Ferrán-FuertesHospital de la Creu Roja d'Hospitalet - Hospital de Sant Joan Despí Moisès Broggi, Sant Joan Despí, Spain.
Elba AgustíBarcelona Tissue Bank - Banc de Sang i Teixits (BTB), Barcelona, Spain.
Eva M Martínez-ConesaBarcelona Tissue Bank - Banc de Sang i Teixits (BTB), Barcelona, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3696-7702
María Luisa Pérez-RodríguezBarcelona Tissue Bank - Banc de Sang i Teixits (BTB), Barcelona, Spain.
Anna VilarrodonaBarcelona Tissue Bank - Banc de Sang i Teixits (BTB), Barcelona, Spain.
Ricardo P Casaroli-MaranoHospital Clinic de Barcelona, Institut Clinic D'Oftalmologia (ICOF), Sabino de Arana s/n, 08028, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1812-9323
AMEED Study Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo study the indications and clinical outcomes, in a real-word setting, of amniotic membrane extract eye drops (AMEED) use for ocular surface disease (OSD).

methodsA retrospective study of patients treated with topical AMEED between January 2018 and January 2020 was conducted. Patients were classified in two groups according to specific OSD-dry eye disease (DED) and wound healing delay (WHD) groups. Demographics, comorbidities, treatment duration and clinical outcomes were analysed.

resultsA total of 50 eyes of 36 patients with or without previous treatments were included. Patients in the DED group presented more systemic comorbidities (83 vs 22%; p < 0.001) and spent more mean time under AMEED treatment (10 vs 7.2 months average) than the WHD group (p = 0.0104). In four patients, long-term treatment (more than 24 months) was reported. Global similar symptomatic improvement was reported for both groups (DED 88.9% vs WHD 100%; p = 0.486), with the WHD group especially consisting in general relief (78%) and the DED group reporting more pain improvement (44%) (p = 0.011). Regarding patients with autologous serum as a previous treatment, no statistical differences were found in subjective or objective improvement. An overall success was achieved in 94.4% of the cases and no adverse events were found.

conclusionAMEED administration is a promising mean to treat OSD such as dry eye, persistent epithelial defect and corneal ulcers. Although AMEED may be effective in the treatment of severe DED and persistent epithelial defect or corneal ulcers, conclusions are limited owing to the absence of controlled clinical trials.

Indexed as

AmnionDry Eye SyndromesHumansOphthalmic SolutionsPlant ExtractsRetrospective StudiesOphthalmic SolutionsPlant ExtractsAmniotic membrane extract eye drops (AMEED)Dry eye diseaseOcular surface diseasePersistent epithelial defectTissue bank

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.