ArticleBMJ open ophthalmology2024
Performance outcomes from a DMEK peeling and preparation wet lab.
Article in BMJ open ophthalmology, 2024. 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.
- Comparative efficacy of Nd:YAG laser peripheral iridotomy and surgical iridectomy in modulating perioperative subclinical inflammation after DMEK.Acta ophthalmologica · 2026Article
- Learning curve and procedural standardization in liquid-bubble DMEK: impact on preparation efficiency, complication rates, and endothelial cell survival.International ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Article
- Donor Tissue Impact on Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty Graft Preparation and Clinical Outcome.Ophthalmic research · 2026Article
- Importance of gauging wet lab training outcome to increase safety and enhance the uptake of DMEK surgery.Eye (London, England) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) preparation performance of trainee surgeons in an ex vivo human donor cornea DMEK wet lab simulation setting.
methodsHuman donor corneoscleral rims unsuitable for transplantation were obtained from Moorfields Lions Eye Bank. At the wet lab, graft stripping was performed by scoring the peripheral endothelium. The trypan blue positive cells (TBPC) and cell density (cells/mm
resultsEight trainee surgeons attended the wet lab each attempting three DMEKs. Between the first and last attempts a significant decrease was seen in the procedural time (17.6 min vs 10.6 min (p<0.05)) and the TBPC % (12.9% vs 3.8% (p<0.05)). The percentage of tears peripherally and centrally also reduced between the first and the last trials (50% vs 13% (p=0.2226) and 38% vs 0% (p=0.1327)). A significant correlation was found between longer peeling times and higher TBPC % (p<0.001) with a 0.7% endothelial mortality increase for each additional minute required to complete the peel.
conclusionsDMEK wet labs provide a controlled risk-free learning opportunity for trainee surgeons to improve confidence and competence. Wet labs improve the success rate of DMEK graft preparation as well as flatten the learning curve. This emphasises the importance of continued support for the expansion of this valuable learning resource, promoting wider uptake of DMEK surgery.
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.