ArticlePloS one2021
Refractive changes of a new asymmetric intracorneal ring segment with variable thickness and base width: A 2D finite-element model.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ex vivo, in vivo and in silico studies of corneal biomechanics: a systematic review.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- Evaluation of design parameters on the outcome of intrastromal ring surgery using biomechanical simulations.PloS one · 2024Article
- Localized Refractive Changes Induced by Symmetric and Progressive Asymmetric Intracorneal Ring Segments Assessed with a 3D Finite-Element Model.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Clinical, tomographic, and topometric outcomes of progressive thickness intracorneal ring segment implantations in duck-type keratoconus.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Asymmetric Intracorneal Ring Segments for the Management of Keratoconus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of current ophthalmologyReview
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the local geometric effects of a unilateral intrastromal ring segment with a combined variation of ring thickness and base width in a finite element simulation, and to compare it against the isolated effect of thickness or base width variation alone.
methodsA two-dimensional finite-element model of a transversely isotropic cornea was created assuming either axisymmetric stress or plane strain condition. The model geometry was composed of a three-layered corneal tissue (epithelium, anterior and posterior stroma) fixed at the limbus. The implantation of a triangular-shape asymmetric ring segment with varying ring thickness (150 to 300 μm) and base width (600 to 800 μm) was simulated. Also, changes induced by thickness or base width alone were studied and compared their combined effect in the asymmetric ring segment. Geometrical deformation of the simulated cornea and sagittal curvature were the main parameters of study.
resultsIncreasing ring thickness and base width along the arc of the asymmetric ring segment produced a more pronounced flattening in this part of the ring. The asymmetric design did find a good balance between maximizing corneal flattening at one end and minimizing it at the other end, compared to the isolated effect of ring thickness and width. Ring thickness was the most robust parameter in flattening both, the central and peripheral cornea.
conclusionThe finite-element model permitted a theoretical study of corneal deformation undergoing implantation of realistic and hypothetical ring geometries. Intracorneal asymmetric ring segments with varying thickness and base width can be a good alternative in corneas with asymmetric keratoconus phenotypes.
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.