ArticleBMJ open ophthalmology2021
Viability of preloaded Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty grafts with 96-hour shipment.
Article in BMJ open 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, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Storage of Corneas With Predissected Descemet Membrane in an Active Storage Machine.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Feasibility of Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty with preloaded and trifolded graft after 96-hour storage and shipping.Eye banking and corneal transplantation · 2025Article
- Plastic vs. glass: the effect of the synthetic material in contact with DMEK tissue during staining on endothelial cell loss.International ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Comparison of corneal endothelial cell density and morphology with Optisol GS and Life4C storage media in the eye bank: a 5-year retrospective analysis.Eye banking and corneal transplantation · 2023Article
- Clinical Outcomes of Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty Using a Preloaded Imported Graft.Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess feasibility and compare the effects of 96-hour shipment of Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) grafts as a scroll or a tri-fold on cell viability. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: DMEK grafts were prepared at the Rocky Mountain Lions Eye Bank. Twenty pre-stripped DMEK grafts, paired from 10 donors, were either tri-folded in an endothelium-in configuration using microforceps and loaded into a plastic Treyetech cartridge, or suctioned in a scrolled endothelium-out configuration into a modified Jones Tube. Grafts were shipped via FedEx to a secondary location and back for 48 hours each way, resulting in a total shipping time of 96 hours. After shipping, grafts were removed from inserters onto glass slides and unfolded using viscoelastic with endothelium facing upwards. Calcein-AM stained grafts were imaged with a fluorescent microscope and endothelial cell loss (ECL) was measured using trainable segmentation in Fiji by a masked grader.
resultsA total of 20 grafts were shipped for 96 hours, split between preloaded tri-folded (n=10) and preloaded scrolled (n=10) tissues. No significant difference in ECL was observed across groups after prolonged shipping (14.8% vs 13.7% ECL respectively, p=0.68).
conclusionFor preloaded DMEK after 96 hours, both scrolled and tri-folded tissue demonstrated clinically acceptable levels of ECL. The data suggest a wider window of time for endothelial cell viability and is promising for the prospect of international shipment of preloaded grafts.
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.