Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy for the management of hyperopic regression after conductive keratoplasty.

Alessandro Meduri, Federica Alessandrello, Miguel Rechichi, Pasquale Aragona

Open access · greenAbstract readCase Reports

In one paragraph

Article in BMJ case reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

1citing papers in PubMed

0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 44% of its field

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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

One-Year Visual and Refractive Outcomes of SmartPulseJournal of clinical medicine · 2024
Article

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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Alessandro MeduriOphthalmology Unit, Department of Biomedical Sciences, University Hospital of Messina, Messina, ME, Italy ameduri@unime.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7546-9178

Federica AlessandrelloOphthalmology Unit, Department of Biomedical Sciences, University Hospital of Messina, Messina, ME, Italy.

Miguel RechichiCentro Polispecialistico Mediterraneo, Sellia Marina, Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy.

Pasquale AragonaOphthalmology Unit, Department of Biomedical Sciences, University Hospital of Messina, Messina, ME, Italy.

University of Messina · ITCentro Polispecialistico Mediterraneo

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several refractive techniques are available for the treatment of hyperopia. Conductive keratoplasty (CK) is a safe and non-ablative procedure suitable for the treatment of low hyperopia and presbyopia. Due to the high rate of regression, it is not a commonly used technique. There is minimal literature about the use of refractive procedures for the treatment of hyperopic regression after CK. We report a case of a 49-year-old man who had undergone bilateral CK 15 years before for the correction of his hyperopia. He experienced a regression, with sph +2.75 cyl -0.50(20) in the right eye and sph +2.50 cyl -0.75(170) in the left eye. Transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (tPRK) was performed with Schwind Amaris 750 s. After 12 months, his best-corrected visual acuity was 20/20, with -0.25 sph in both eyes. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first reported case of tPRK performed after CK.

Indexed as

Corneal TransplantationHyperopiaPhotorefractive KeratectomyCorneaFollow-Up StudiesHumansLasers, ExcimerMaleMiddle AgedRefraction, OcularTreatment OutcomeVisual Acuityanterior chamberophthalmology

Identifiers

PMID33910801

DOI10.1136/bcr-2020-241144

PMCPMC8094325

OpenAlexW3158887095

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.