Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38502349›Full record

ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2024

Incidence, risk factors, and treatment of retroprosthetic membranes following Boston keratoprosthesis eyes and the impact of glaucoma surgery.

Beshoy S Gabriel, Cason B Robbins, C Ellis Wisely, Rami S Gabriel, Melissa B Daluvoy, Sharon Fekrat

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Bioinspired Tissue Transparency: Achieving Sclera-to-Cornea Transplantation.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Beshoy S GabrielCalifornia University of Science and Medicine, 1501 Violet St., Colton, CA, 92324, USA. gabrielb@cusm.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-2842-3543
Cason B RobbinsDepartment of Ophthalmology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
C Ellis WiselyDepartment of Ophthalmology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Rami S GabrielDepartment of Ophthalmology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Melissa B DaluvoyDepartment of Ophthalmology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Sharon FekratDepartment of Ophthalmology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Duke University · USUniversity of California System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess incidence, risk factors, and treatment of retroprosthetic membrane (RPM) formation in eyes following Boston keratoprosthesis (Kpro) implantation and their correlation with glaucoma drainage device placement (GDD).

methodsA retrospective review was performed on eyes that underwent Kpro type I or II implantation between 2005 and 2020 at a tertiary academic center. Multiple variables were collected including preoperative characteristics, presence of RPM, management of RPM, and outcomes including corrected visual acuity (VA). A Fischer's exact test was used to evaluate the significance of risk factors of RPM formation and an odds ratio was calculated for each possible risk factor. A Mann-Whitney U test was used to evaluate comparisons between outcomes and qualitative analyses.

resultsOf the 87 eyes identified, 37 (43%) developed an RPM within an average of 1.5 years (range, 31 days-7.5 years) following Kpro implantation. Mean follow-up duration was 4.3 years. Eyes that developed RPM had significantly worse preoperative VA compared to those that did not (logMAR 2.55 vs. 2.28, p = 0.022). The mean number of prior penetrating keratoplasty procedures trended higher in eyes that developed RPM (2.46 vs. 2.18, p = 0.44) but was not significant. GDD placement after Kpro implantation was associated with an increased risk of RPM formation (RR = 1.69 p = 0.026). Of the 37 eyes that developed an RPM following Kpro, 17 (47%) were treated with Nd:YAG laser, and four of those 17 (21%) also underwent pars plana vitrectomy (PPV). Seven of 37 eyes (19%) underwent PPV without Nd:YAG. Comparisons between RPM occurrence and final VA were not significant.

conclusionsThe incidence of RPM formation following Kpro implantation was 43%. Eyes that developed RPM had significantly worse preoperative VA. GDD placement after Kpro implantation increased the risk of developing RPM. Final VA and occurrence of RPM were not significantly different between the Nd:YAG and PPV treatment groups.

Indexed as

Corneal DiseasesGlaucomaPostoperative ComplicationsVisual AcuityAdultAgedAged, 80 and overArtificial OrgansCorneaFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGlaucoma Drainage ImplantsHumansIncidenceIntraocular PressureMaleBoston keratoprosthesis (Kpro)Glaucoma drainage device (GDD)Penetrating keratoplastyRetroprosthetic membrane (RPM)

Identifiers

PMID38502349
OpenAlexW4392963260

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.