Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41613332›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025

Comparative morphological analysis of the zonular apparatus in porcine, feline, and canine species.

Ye Lu, Kuankuan Wu, Zhiqiao Liang, Kun Lv, Zeyuan Wang, Fengrui Yang, Yitong Hu, Huijuan Wu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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

8 authors.

Ye LuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.
Kuankuan WuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.
Zhiqiao LiangDepartment of Ophthalmology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.
Kun LvDepartment of Ophthalmology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.
Zeyuan WangDepartment of Ophthalmology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.
Fengrui YangDepartment of Ophthalmology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.
Yitong HuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.
Huijuan WuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To characterize and compare the morphology of the zonular apparatus in pigs, cats, and dogs to identify the optimal animal model for studying zonular pathophysiology in angle-closure mechanisms. Methods: Porcine ( Results: Significant interspecies differences were observed in zonular fiber density, orientation, and insertion patterns. The sagittal width of posterior vitreous zonule region was notably narrower than in humans (3-4 mm): approximately 0.56 mm in pigs, 0.40 mm in cats, and 0.30 mm in dogs. UBM imaging successfully detected vitreous zonules in porcine and feline eyes, but failed to visualize them in canine eyes. Dogs and cats exhibited similar zonular and ciliary body morphology; however, both species displayed leaf-shaped ciliary bodies and looser zonular arrangements compared to the more compact porcine configuration. Ultrastructural analysis using SEM identified consistent vitreous zonule architecture in all species. Conclusion: Among the three species examined, unique zonular fiber origins and the ubiquitous vitreous zonules support the use of pigs or cats in studies of accommodation and glaucoma pathogenesis.

Indexed as

across speciesanimal modelglaucomavitreous zonuleszonular apparatus

Identifiers

PMID41613332
PMCPMC12847380

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.