ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2026
Morphological Distinction of Descemet's Membrane Protrusions in Bullous Keratopathy and Guttae in Fuchs Endothelial Corneal Dystrophy.
Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To characterize dome-shaped protrusions (DSPs), a previously unrecognized alteration of Descemet's membrane (DM) in bullous keratopathy (BK), and to determine how DSPs differ from classic guttae in Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (FECD). Methods: DM specimens were collected from 75 eyes with BK during endothelial keratoplasty. A subset of eyes with sufficiently dense protrusions (≥50 per field at ×200 magnification) was selected for detailed analyses. Flat-mounted DMs were examined by phase-contrast microscopy, scanning electron microscopy, and immunofluorescence staining. Quantitative analyses included measurements of protrusion area, centroid spacing, and density. Texture characteristics were assessed using fast Fourier transform, gray-level co-occurrence matrix metrics, and local binary pattern profiling. Results: DSPs appeared as small, blurred-edge elevations lacking the halo and fusion typical of guttae. Compared with guttae, DSPs showed smaller areas (mean of 69.5 µm² vs. 148.7 µm²), greater centroid spacing (21.8 µm vs. 15.3 µm), and lower density (161 protrusions/mm² vs. 359 protrusions/mm²) (P < 0.01 for all). Scanning electron microscopy demonstrated smooth, nodular excrescences in FECD, whereas DSPs displayed fine fibrillar surfaces. Immunohistochemistry revealed strong periguttae fibronectin and collagen I deposition in FECD, whereas DSPs were negative for both markers and were instead surrounded by diffuse staining across the DM surface. The fast Fourier transform, gray-level co-occurrence matrix, and local binary pattern analyses showed that DSPs exhibited smoother, more homogeneous, and less anisotropic microtexture signatures than were observed for FECD guttae. Conclusions: DSPs may represent a previously unrecognized pattern of DM remodeling in BK. Their discovery provides new insight into endothelial stress responses.
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.