Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38946004›Full record

ReviewEye and vision (London, England)2024

Keratectasia severity staging and progression assessment based on the biomechanical E-staging.

Elias Flockerzi, Berthold Seitz

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Eye and vision (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03923101 (The Homburg Keratoconus Center), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT03923101 recruitingnot on this map

The Homburg Keratoconus Center (HKC) - a Keratoconus Observation Study

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorUniversität des SaarlandesRan2011 to 2036Enrolled5,000ConditionsKeratoconusArmsTopographic, tomographic and biomechanical analysis.
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Is it really keratoconus or pseudo-keratoconus? - Topographic mimicry.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Elias FlockerziDepartment of Ophthalmology, Saarland University Medical Center, Kirrberger Straße, Building 22, 66421, Homburg, Germany. elias.flockerzi@uks.eu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0423-3624
Berthold SeitzDepartment of Ophthalmology, Saarland University Medical Center, Kirrberger Straße, Building 22, 66421, Homburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Until recently, corneal topography has been the gold standard in detecting keratectasia and monitoring its progression. The recently introduced ABCD tomographic keratoconus staging system focuses on anterior ("A") and posterior ("B") radius of curvature, thinnest corneal thickness ("C"), best-corrected visual acuity with spectacles ("D") and is supplemented with the introduction of the biomechanical E-staging (BEST, "E"). The need for biomechanical staging arose from the fact of altered biomechanical characteristics of keratectasia in comparison to healthy corneas. Ectatic corneas usually exhibit a biomechanical weakening and greater deformation than healthy corneas when exposed to a biomechanical stressor such as a standardized air puff indentation as provided by the Corvis ST® (CST, Oculus, Wetzlar, Germany). The BEST is based on the linear term of the Corvis Biomechanical Index (CBI) and provides a biomechanical keratoconus severity staging and progression assessment within the CST software. This review traces the development of the BEST as an addition to the tomographic ABCD staging system and highlights its strengths and limitations when applied in daily practice for the detection, monitoring and progression assessment in keratectasia.

Indexed as

ABCD stagingBiomechanicsCorvisE-stagingKeratoconusTomography

Identifiers

PMID38946004
PMCPMC11215830

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.