ArticleFrontiers in medicine2022
Biomechanical Considerations of Patching Material for Posterior Scleral Reinforcement Surgery.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2022. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Research progress and applications of biologically derived materials in scleral reconstruction].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2026Review
- Strategies for the Prevention and Control of Complications of Pathological Myopia: A Systematic Review of Research Progress from Axial Control to Target Organ Protection.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
- A Self-Generated Electricity-Driven Sclera reinforcement bionic piezoelectric patch for Management of High Myopia.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2025Article
- The Role of Scleral Changes in the Progression of Myopia: A Review and Future Directions.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Review
- Clinical outcomes of posterior scleral reinforcement in Chinese high myopia children.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To characterize biomechanical properties of genipin-crosslinked human dura mater as reinforcing material for posterior scleral reinforcement (PSR) and to compare it with crosslinked human sclera. Methods: Donor dura mater and sclera were crosslinked in the same optimized genipin solution. Resistance to enzyme degradation for both materials were investigated by exposing the materials to accelerated enzyme degrading. Elastic modulus and tensile strength were measured by biomechanics testing equipment. Crosslinked human dura mater was used as reinforcing patch in PSR on 57 adult pathologic myopic eyes. The patients were followed up for an average 3 years. The main outcome was eye globe axial length change and safety profile of the reinforcing material. Results: Crosslinked dura mater demonstrated similar percentage weight loss to crosslinked sclera when exposed to enzymatic solution. Dura mater has higher density than sclera. The retaining elastic modulus after enzyme exposure was 72.02 MPa for crosslinked dura mater while 53.88 MPa for crosslinked sclera, 34% greater for crosslinked dura mater, Conclusion: Crosslinked human dura mater may be superior to crosslinked human sclera as reinforcing material for PSR to manage progression of high myopia. This material was well tolerated on human eye.
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.