ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Changes in Stress-Strain Index and Corneal Biomechanics in Granular Corneal Dystrophy.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The aim of this study was to assess stress-strain index (SSI) and corneal biomechanical parameters in eyes with granular corneal dystrophy (GCD). Methods: This case-control study included 12 eyes of 12 patients with GCD (mean age 45.2 ± 18.7 years) and 20 eyes of 20 healthy individuals (mean age 54.4 ± 3.8 years). In addition to SSI, dynamic corneal response (DCR) parameters were assessed at the first and second applanation, including length (AL1, AL2), velocity (AV1, AV2), time (AT1, AT2), and deformation amplitude (DA A1, DA A2), and at the highest concavity (HC) phase, including DA, peak distance (PD), radius (HCR), and DA ratio (DAR 1 and 2 mm), by Corvis ST. Central corneal thickness (CCT) and biomechanically corrected intraocular pressure (bIOP) were considered covariates in comparing DCR parameters between the two groups. Results: SSI was statistically significantly lower in eyes with GCD than in normal eyes (p = 0.04). The corneal velocity towards the first applanation was 0.02 m/s faster in the GCD eyes AV1 (0.15 ± 0.02 vs. 0.13 ± 0.02 m/s, p < 0.001) and IR (7.48 ± 1.01 vs. 6.80 ± 1.22 mm, p = 0.003) parameters were significantly higher in the GDC group, while AT1 (7.33 ± 0.66 vs. 7.47 ± 0.36 ms, p = 0.002) and HCR (7.42 ± 0.76 vs. 8.20 ± 1.08 mm, p = 0.014) were significantly lower in the normal group. Conclusions: GCD led to a change in biomechanical properties of the cornea. SSI refers to fewer stiff corneas in GDC than normal.
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.