ArticleTherapeutic advances in ophthalmology
Is ultra-thin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty a viable alternative to Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Therapeutic advances in ophthalmology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty compared with ultrathin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty: a meta-analysis.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2023Pooled it
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ultra-thin Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (UT-DSAEK) is a recently developed surgical procedure that has shown promising results for the management of various corneal endothelial diseases. Objectives: To evaluate the outcomes of the UT-DSAEK to the Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK). Design: A systematic analysis of the studies comparing UT-DSAEK with DMEK by evaluating one or more outcomes (vision, complications, and post-operative endothelial cell counts) was performed. The meta-analysis was done if two or more studies reported a common outcome. Methods: We used PubMed, EMBASE, and SCOPUS databases to identify articles comparing the outcomes of UT-DSAEK with DMEK and performed a meta-analysis using RevMan, version 5.4. Results: A total of six studies were included in this review (two randomized clinical trials and four non-randomized comparative studies). Our analysis showed the patients who underwent DMEK cases showed better visual outcomes with a mean difference of 0.06 LogMAR (95% CI: 0.04-0.09) in BCVA, albeit with Conclusion: Although the literature is limited on UT-DSAEK with post-operative visual acuity that could be practically at par with DMEK, lesser complication rates and comparable post-operative endothelial cells could be a suitable alternative to DMEK for corneal endothelial pathologies.
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.