ArticleCell and tissue banking2026
Management of corneal allograft rejection in post-penetrating keratoplasty patients: a retrospective analysis.
Article in Cell and tissue banking, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To evaluate the treatment success and reversal rate of corneal allograft rejections in post-penetrating keratoplasty patients. Retrospective cohort study was performed in post-penetrating keratoplasty patients treated for corneal allograft rejection between September 2015 and August 2024 in a tertiary eye center in Debrecen, Hungary. Indication of keratoplasty, onset of the allograft rejection, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), corneal transparency on slit lamp examination and applied treatment were recorded. In our institution's patient registry, 68 allograft rejection episodes were found. Before the rejection, all grafts were completely transparent. The rejection episodes occurred median 21 months after surgery. Diagnosis and treatment took place median 5 days after the onset of symptoms. Allograft rejection could be successfully reversed in 48 of the total 68 cases (70.6%). Treatment was adjusted individually and all patients received local treatment; 16 received only local and 52 received combined systemic and local corticosteroids resulting in a similar rejection reversal rate (13/16 vs. 35/52; p = 0.359). Comparing first (47) and repeat grafts (21), there were no significant differences between the treatment success rate (33/47 vs. 15/21; P = 1.000) and the frequency of combined local-plus-systemic treatment (34/47 vs. 18/21; p = 0.355). Before the rejection episodes, BCVA was 0.40 ± 0.30, which decreased following the rejection (0.28 ± 0.28; p < 0.001). This reduction in BCVA was observed in successfully treated cases as well (0.44 ± 0.28 vs. 0.38 ± 0.27; p = 0.008). Our dexamethasone-based local treatment demonstrated similar effectiveness in reversing corneal allograft rejections in patients underwent penetrating keratoplasty compared to data on prednisolone by other studies. However, systemic steroid augmentation might be needed more frequently when using topical dexamethasone.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41569387What 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.