Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41158166›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of ophthalmology2025

An updated comprehensive review on keratopigmentation.

Hassan Hashemi, Ali Hadavandkhani, Mehdi Khabazkhoob

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Hassan HashemiNoor Ophthalmology Research Center, Noor Eye Hospital, Tehran 1983963113, Iran.
Ali HadavandkhaniNoor Research Center for Ophthalmic Epidemiology, Noor Eye Hospital, Tehran 1968653111, Iran.
Mehdi KhabazkhoobDepartment of Medical Surgical Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran 1983969411, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to differentiate between the therapeutic and purely cosmetic aspects of keratopigmentation by examining the results of previous studies. Corneal opacity, corneal leukoma, and iris abnormalities represent the primary reasons for keratopigmentation in therapeutic settings. In therapeutic contexts, the most commonly reported adverse effects included inflammation, foreign body sensation, light sensitivity, reduced intraocular pressure, and neovascularization. The side effects most frequently noted in purely cosmetic applications were photophobia and ectasia. In therapeutic scenarios, patients who experience pre-operative vision impairment often report not only the absence of visual loss post-procedure but also an enhancement in visual acuity, accompanied by alleviation of symptoms such as glare. In purely cosmetic procedures, visual acuity tends to remain stable. Research indicates that dissatisfaction with keratopigmentation results is more prevalent in studies aimed at therapeutic interventions compared to cosmetic enhancements. Furthermore, instances of discoloration and fading are more frequently observed in therapeutic cases than in cosmetic ones, including the need for retouching. The use of keratopigmentation in both therapeutic and cosmetic settings produces positive and acceptable results, especially in cosmetic applications. Nevertheless, complications are more commonly observed in therapeutic situations, which underscores the importance of candidate selection for keratopigmentation procedures.

Indexed as

corneal leukomacorneal opacitycosmeticiris abnormalitykeratopigmentation

Identifiers

PMID41158166
PMCPMC12554537

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.