ArticleFrontiers in ophthalmology2024
Intraoperative optical coherence tomography imaging for assessment of anterior chamber gas fill.
Article in Frontiers in ophthalmology, 2024. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: During endothelial keratoplasty, anterior chamber gas is titrated to a desired fill, which is difficult to optimize by visualization alone. This study evaluates how an anterior chamber gas fill correlates with intraocular pressure (IOP) and iris-angle configuration as identified by optical coherence tomography (OCT). Methods: Eleven cadaveric eyes were studied in three configurations: baseline, air-fill just spanning limbus-to-limbus ("full-fill"), and air-fill maximally filling the anterior chamber ("overfill"). At each configuration, IOP was measured by Tonopen and iris-angle was determined by analyzing OCT images. Results: No differences in IOP or irisangles were identified between baseline and full-fill configurations (p=0.113 and p=0.152, respectively). When compared to overfill configuration, differences in IOP and iris-angles were identified for baseline (p<0.001 and p=0.001, respectively) and full-fill configuration (p=0.001 and p=0.039, respectively). Discussion: These findings highlight that en-face visualization of full-fill may not be indicative of IOP elevation. A significant difference in IOP and iris-angle exists between full-fill and overfill configurations. Intraoperative OCT can serve as a useful surrogate to identify the extent of fill.
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.