ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie1995
Cellular fibronectin and tenascin in experimental perforating scleral wounds with incarceration of the vitreous.
Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 1995. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tissue Responses and Wound Healing following Laser Scleral Microporation for Presbyopia Therapy.Translational vision science & technology · 2020Article
- Expression Profile of the Integrin Receptor Subunits in the Guinea Pig Sclera.Current eye research · 2017Article
- The role of fibronectin in corneal wound healing explored by a physician-scientist.Japanese journal of ophthalmology · 2012Review
- Plasminogen activation in epiretinal membranes.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 1996Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPosterior perforating eye injury carries a high risk of visual loss due to the formation of intravireal and epiretinal scar tissue. Intraocular scar formation in patients with retinal detachment has been shown to be associated with elevated intravitreal FN levels. The extracellular matrix glycoproteins fibronectin (FN) and tenascin (TN) have been located in epiretinal scar membranes. As both FN and TN are also involved in healing of cutaneous and corneal wounds, we undertook to study their expression in rabbit perforating scleral wounds with vitreous incarceration.
methodsA perforating scleral wound was produced and sutured without removal of vitreous from the wound in 18 pigmented rabbits. The rabbits were killed at various times (1 h to 21 days) after the operation, and the indirect immunohistochemical method was used for demonstration of FN and TN. Monoclonal mouse hybridoma antibodies 52 DH1 and 100 EB2, recognizing the cellular form of FN (cFN) and TN, respectively, were used.
resultsDuring the first post-operative week immunoreaction for glycoproteins, both the locally produced cFN and TN, were observed at the scar tissue containing the prolabed vitreous and the adjacent sclera. Subsequently, the reaction gradually shifted to the vitreal side of the wound, and 3 weeks after the operation it was almost completely restricted to a separated mass of vitreous beneath the scar.
conclusionThe expression of cFN and TN in the scleral scar and vitreous is indicative of their local synthesis. The shift of the expression of those proteins to the vitreal side of the wound with time suggests that the scarring process in the vitreous is delayed compared to the sclera.
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.