ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2025
Comparison of Surgical Outcomes of Graft Survival Rate Using Surgeon Cut versus Precut DSAEK Tissue.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare endothelial graft outcomes after DSAEK using pre-cut tissue and surgeon cut tissue in terms of final visual outcome and graft failure at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Patients and Methods: This retrospective study examined patients who underwent DSAEK with CB or surgeon-prepared tissue for any etiology of endothelial dysfunction. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), corneal thickness, endothelial cell count (ECC), and complications were examined before and throughout the 1-year postoperative period. Results: Total number of cases is 98 eyes of 98 patients. Fifty-five surgeon-cut grafts were compared to 43 precut grafts. Preoperative visual acuity was >/= 20/60 in 1.8% and 0.0%, >20/60-20/200 in 21.8% and 7%, and less than 20/200 in 74.6% and 86.1% for surgeon cut and precut group respectively. Visual acuity at last follow-up was >/= 20/60 in 32.4% and 5.3%, >20/60-20/200 in 29.7% and 10.5%, and less than 20/200 in 37.8% and 84.2% for surgeon cut and precut group, respectively. At 6 months, 41 (83.7%) in the surgeon cut group and 27 (67.5%) in the precut groups completed the follow-up. Of these, 10 (24.4%) and 14 (32.6%) respectively, ended up with graft failure. The statistically significant difference in graft failure was maintained until 12 months: 37 (82.2%) in the surgeon cut group and 20 (58.8%) in the pre-cut group completed the follow-up. Of these, 11 (29.7%) and 14 (70%) labeled as failed grafts, respectively. Conclusion: We found a higher rate of graft failure 6 to 12 months postoperatively in precut tissue grafts than in surgeon cut tissue grafts despite both tissues being provided by the same eye banks.
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.