Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34011733›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of ophthalmology2021

Hospital Cornea Retrieval Programme in a startup eye bank - A retrospective analysis and lessons learned.

Himanshi Aggarwal, Neeti Gupta, Prashant Garg, Manisha Sharma, Sanjeev Mittal, Ravi Kant

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 39% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Himanshi AggarwalDepartment of Ophthalmology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India.
Neeti GuptaDepartment of Ophthalmology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India.
Prashant GargDirector, Kallam Anji Reddy Campus, Director, Kode Venkatadri Chowdary Campus, Network Head of Eye Banking and Consultant, The Cornea & Anterior Segment Services, The Cornea Institute (TCI), LV Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Manisha SharmaDepartment of Ophthalmology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India.
Sanjeev MittalDepartment of Ophthalmology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India.
Ravi KantDirector and CEO, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India.
All India Institute of Medical Sciences RishikeshL V Prasad Eye Institute · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to share our experience in the hospital cornea retrieval program as a new eye bank. Methods: This was a retrospective study conducted in a tertiary care institute from August 26, 2019 to March 22, 2020. The medical and eye bank records were analyzed for hospital mortality, mortuary records, and donors approached. The corneal collection was divided between Voluntary (received from voluntary calls), HCRP (cornea received from hospital deaths), and Medico-Legal Cases (received from MLC deaths in hospital) to see the trend of donation and utilization over time. Results: During the study period, 154 corneas (77 pairs) were collected. The HCRP provided a major source of corneas 58.4% (90 corneas) as compared to voluntary 19.5% (30 corneas) and MLC 22.1%(34 corneas). There were younger tissues in MLC than HCRP donors, and older tissues in Voluntary donors, and the difference was statistically significant. There was no significant difference in the quality of optical grade tissues and the utilization of corneas for transplants between the three groups. Post hoc analysis showed more non-optical tissues in the voluntary donations (P = 0.004), maximum donors with medical contraindications in the HCRP group (P = 0.001), and time-lapse in corneal retrieval in MLC cases (P = 0.0001). Of these 154 corneas, 78 (50.6%) were assessed as suitable for transplantation, of which 59 (75.6%) tissues were optical grade tissues. The overall utilization was 39.6%. Conclusion: HCRP is indeed challenging for a new eye bank, but proper understanding and implementing strategies may help for good utilization of tissues.

Indexed as

Corneal TransplantationEye BanksCorneaHospitalsHumansRetrospective StudiesTissue DonorsCorneal transplanteye bankinghospital corneal retrieval programmedicolegal donationvoluntary donation

Identifiers

PMID34011733
PMCPMC8302265
OpenAlexW3161329915

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.