↓ Skip to main content

Donor, Recipient, and Operative Factors Associated with Graft Success in the Cornea Preservation Time Study

Overview of attention for article published in Ophthalmology, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
patent
1 patent

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Donor, Recipient, and Operative Factors Associated with Graft Success in the Cornea Preservation Time Study
Published in
Ophthalmology, August 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.ophtha.2018.08.002
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To associate donor, recipient, and operative factors with graft success 3 years after Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty (DSAEK) in the Cornea Preservation Time Study (CPTS). Cohort study within a multicenter, double-masked, randomized clinical trial. One thousand ninety individuals (1330 study eyes) with a median age of 70 years undergoing DSAEK for Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy (94% of eyes) or pseudophakic or aphakic corneal edema (PACE; 6% of eyes). Eyes undergoing DSAEK were randomized to receive a donor cornea with preservation time (PT) of 0 to 7 days (n = 675) or 8 to 14 days (n = 655). Donor, recipient, and operative parameters were recorded prospectively. Graft failure was defined as regraft for any reason, a graft that failed to clear by 8 weeks after surgery, or an initially clear graft that became and remained cloudy for 90 days. Failure in the first 8 weeks was classified further as primary donor failure or early failure, in the absence or presence of operative complications, respectively. Proportional hazards and logistic regression models were used to estimate risk ratios (RR) and 99% confidence intervals (CIs) for graft failure. Graft success at 3 years. One thousand two hundred fifty-one of 1330 grafts (94%) remained clear at 3 years and were considered successful. After adjusting for PT, tissue from donors with diabetes (RR, 2.35; 99% CI, 1.03-5.33) and operative complications (RR, 4.21; 99% CI, 1.42-12.47) were associated with increased risk for primary or early failure. Preoperative diagnosis of PACE (RR, 3.59; 99% CI, 1.05-12.24) was associated with increased risk for late failure by 3 years after surgery compared with Fuchs dystrophy. Graft success showed little variation among other factors evaluated, including donor age (RR, 1.19 per decade; 99% CI, 0.91-1.56 per decade), preoperative donor endothelial cell density (RR, 1.10 per 500 cells; 99% CI, 0.74-1.63 per 500 cells), graft diameter (RR, 1.22 per 1 mm; 99% CI, 0.39-3.76 per 1 mm), and injector use for graft insertion (RR, 0.92; 99% CI, 0.40-2.10). Descemet stripping automated endothelial keratoplasty success in the early and entire postoperative period is more likely when the donor did not have diabetes and was without operative complications and in the long-term postoperative period in recipients with Fuchs dystrophy compared with those with PACE. Mechanisms whereby diabetic donors and PACE recipients reduce the rate of graft success after DSAEK warrant further study.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 78 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 10%
Other 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 13 17%
Unknown 38 49%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 44 56%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 September 2020.
All research outputs
#9,463,643
of 34,089,221 outputs
Outputs from Ophthalmology
#3,524
of 8,788 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#116,489
of 372,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ophthalmology
#38
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,089,221 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,788 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 372,202 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.