Trial reportCornea2026
Diabetes Endothelial Keratoplasty Study: Methods and Impact on the Use of Corneas From Donors With Diabetes for Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty.
Trial report in Cornea, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05134480 (Diabetes Endothelial Keratoplasty Study), which is not on this 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.
Diabetes Endothelial Keratoplasty Study (DEKS): Impact of Diabetes on Corneal Transplant Success and Endothelial Cell Loss
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Endothelial Cell Loss 1 Year After Successful DMEK in the Diabetes Endothelial Keratoplasty Study: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA ophthalmology · 2025Trial
- Donor Diabetes and 1-Year Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty Success Rate: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA ophthalmology · 2025Trial
- Relationship between age, pseudophakia, diabetes mellitus and endothelial cell density in corneal donor tissue: a 10-year retrospective study.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2026Observational
- Factors Associated with Successful Descemet Membrane Endothelial Keratoplasty in the Diabetes Endothelial Keratoplasty Study.Ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Validation of Automated Software for Guttae Quantification in Fuchs Endothelial Corneal Dystrophy.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeDescribe aims, methods, characteristics of donors, donor corneas and recipients, and potential impact of the Diabetes Endothelial Keratoplasty Study (DEKS).
methodsThe DEKS is a randomized, clinical trial to assess graft success and endothelial cell density (ECD) 1 year after Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) using corneas from donors with versus without diabetes in a 1:2 minimization assignment. Diabetes severity in the donor is assessed by medical history, postmortem HbA1c, and donor skin advanced glycation end-products and oxidation markers. A central image analysis reading center assesses baseline donor, 1-month and 1-year postoperative ECD.
resultsThe DEKS used corneas from 1154 donors for 1421 DMEK procedures on 1097 participants (324 bilateral) at 28 clinical sites. Forty-eight tissue preparations failed (3%). Mean donor age was 65 years; mean eye bank-determined screening ECD was 2709 cells/mm 2 . Ultimately, 106 (9%) of 1154 donors without diabetes history were classified as diabetic based on postmortem HbA1c ≥6.5%, and 509 (36%) of 1421 donor lenticules were classified as coming from diabetic donors. Recipients were 58% female, 96% White, and 53% phakic. Study eyes were treated for Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (96%), pseudophakic corneal edema (2%), and failed endothelial keratoplasty (2%). Mean recipient age was 70 years; 21% had diabetes history and 26 (2%) had central laboratory determined HbA1c ≥6.5% without diabetes history.
conclusionsThe DEKS will increase understanding of factors related to DMEK success while determining whether diabetes and/or diabetes severity in the donor and/or recipient adversely affects graft success and endothelial cell loss.
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.