Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35035215›Full record

ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2022

Corneal Biomechanics for Ocular Hypertension, Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma, and Amyloidotic Glaucoma: A Comparative Study by Corvis ST.

Nisa Silva, André Ferreira, Pedro Manuel Baptista, Ana Figueiredo, Rita Reis, Isabel Sampaio, João Beirão, Riccardo Vinciguerra, Pedro Menéres, Maria João Menéres

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Inter-eye comparison of corneal stiffness parameters in primary open-angle glaucoma patients with unilateral damage.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Ocular Biomechanics and Glaucoma.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Nisa SilvaOphthalmology Department, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, Porto, 4099-001, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-5607-3212
André FerreiraOphthalmology Department, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, Porto, 4099-001, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-8577-5128
Pedro Manuel BaptistaOphthalmology Department, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, Porto, 4099-001, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-8285-1084
Ana FigueiredoOphthalmology Department, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, Porto, 4099-001, Portugal.
Rita ReisOphthalmology Department, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, Porto, 4099-001, Portugal.
Isabel SampaioOphthalmology Department, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, Porto, 4099-001, Portugal.
João BeirãoOphthalmology Department, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, Porto, 4099-001, Portugal.
Riccardo VinciguerraOphthalmology Department, Humanitas San Pio X Hospital, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2280-9981
Pedro MenéresOphthalmology Department, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, Porto, 4099-001, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-1989-3465
Maria João MenéresOphthalmology Department, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, Porto, 4099-001, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-7647-6692
Centro Hospitalar do Porto · PTUniversidade do Porto · PTUniversity of Liverpool · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo evaluate biomechanical parameters of the cornea provided by Corvis ST in patients with ocular hypertension, primary open-angle glaucoma, and amyloidotic glaucoma and to compare with healthy controls.

methodsThis was a cross-sectional study of patients with ocular hypertension, primary open-angle glaucoma, and amyloidotic glaucoma that underwent Corvis ST imaging. Primary outcome was the comparison of corneal biomechanical parameters between study groups after adjusting for age, gender, Goldmann intraocular pressure (GAT-IOP), and prostaglandin analogues medication. Secondary outcome was the comparison of different IOP measurements in each group.

resultsOne hundred and eighty-three eyes from 115 patients were included: 61 with primary open-angle glaucoma, 32 with amyloidotic glaucoma, 37 with ocular hypertension and 53 were healthy controls. Amyloidotic glaucoma group had smaller radius (p=0.025), lower deflection amplitude at highest concavity (p=0.019), and higher integrated radius (p=0.014) than controls. Ocular hypertension group had higher stiffness parameter at first applanation (p=0.043) than those with primary open-angle glaucoma, and higher stress-strain index (p=0.049) than those with amyloidotic glaucoma. Biomechanically corrected intraocular pressure was significantly lower than Goldmann intraocular pressure in group with primary open-angle glaucoma (p=0.005) and control group (p=0.013), and Goldmann intraocular pressure adjusted for pachymetry in group with primary open-angle glaucoma (p=0.01).

conclusionEyes with amyloidotic glaucoma have more deformable corneas, while eyes with ocular hypertension have less deformable corneas. These findings may be linked to the susceptibility to glaucomatous damage and progression. There were significant differences between Goldmann applanation tonometry and biomechanically corrected intraocular ocular pressure provided by Corvis ST.

Indexed as

amyloidosiscorneal biomechanicsglaucomaGoldmann tonometryocular hypertension

Identifiers

PMID35035215
PMCPMC8754459
OpenAlexW4205335423

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.