ArticleInternational ophthalmology2026
Comparative analysis of higher-order aberration profiles in macular and granular corneal dystrophies.
Article in International ophthalmology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare corneal topographic characteristics and higher-order aberration (HOA) profiles between macular corneal dystrophy (MCD) and granular corneal dystrophy (GCD) and to identify phenotype-specific structural determinants of optical degradation.
methodsThis cross-sectional comparative study included 81 eyes (49 MCD, 32 GCD) evaluated using Scheimpflug-Placido-based tomography. Corneal topographic parameters and wavefront-derived aberrations were analyzed over a 6-mm optical zone. Between-group comparisons were performed using the Mann-Whitney U test with false discovery rate correction. Spearman correlation and multivariable regression analyses were used to assess structural-optical associations.
resultsPatients with GCD were older than those with MCD (p=0.006). MCD eyes demonstrated significantly greater astigmatism (p=0.001), lower corneal volume and central corneal thickness (both p<0.001), and steeper anterior mean keratometry (p<0.001). Total HOA burden was comparable between groups; however, GCD showed significantly higher spherical aberration (p<0.001) and posterior RMS values (p=0.001). Anterior Kmax demonstrated the strongest correlations with total RMS (ρ=0.66), total HOA (ρ=0.75), anterior RMS (ρ=0.67), and anterior HOA (ρ=0.73) (all p<0.01). Multivariable analysis identified anterior Kmax as the strongest independent predictor of multiple aberration parameters, while posterior aberrations showed phenotype-specific associations.
conclusionsAlthough MCD and GCD exhibited similar overall HOA magnitude, they demonstrated distinct aberration profiles and structural-optical relationships. GCD was characterized by increased spherical and posterior aberrations, whereas MCD showed broader associations between structural abnormalities and optical degradation. Phenotype-specific HOA analysis may improve characterization of visual dysfunction and support more individualized management strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42661102What 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.