ArticleDigital journal of ophthalmology : DJO2025
Comparing tolerability and outcomes of cryopreserved and dehydrated amniotic membrane transplantations in the management of corneal disease.
Article in Digital journal of ophthalmology : DJO, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate the clinical outcomes of dehydrated versus cryopreserved amniotic membrane transplantation for corneal disease. Methods: Clinical data from 56 patients were analyzed retrospectively, including indications for treatment, number of amniotic membrane transplant (AMT) interventions, duration of therapy, use of adjunct medications, visual outcomes, and transplant tolerability. To analyze patient transplant tolerability, medical records were reviewed for relevant keywords at 1 week and 1 month after implantation. Results: A total of 71 AMTs of 56 patients were included. At both follow-up intervals, patients who received a cryopreserved amniotic membrane transplant (CAMT) reported more side effects than did patients who received a dehydrated amniotic membrane transplant (DAMT). Those in the CAMT group also reported greater improvement in vision and a greater feeling of wellness at both intervals compared with patients in the DAMT group. Patients in the DAMT were less likely to require repeat treatments and achieved a higher percent resolution of the primary indication. Conclusions: In our study cohort, cryopreserved amniotic membranes appear to provide greater patient satisfaction, whereas dehydrated membranes appear to provide better clinical outcomes, with less need for repeat treatment. Because of limitations in stratifying disease severity, it cannot be concluded without a prospective cohort trial that the need for repeat treatment is not due to more severe disease in the cryopreserved group.
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.