Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19003195›Full record

ArticleCytotechnology2007

Limbal stem cells, a review of their identification and culture for clinical use.

Finbarr O'Sullivan, Martin Clynes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cytotechnology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Cell-based Therapies for Corneal and Retinal Disorders.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. A mathematical approach to human pterygium shape.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2016
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Ocular stem cells: a status update!Stem cell research & therapy · 2014
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Limbal stem cell transplantation: an evidence-based analysis.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2008
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Finbarr O'SullivanNational Institute for Cellular Biotechnology, Dublin City University, Dublin 9, Glasnevin, Ireland, Finbarr.osullivan@dcu.ie.
Martin Clynes

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The surface of the eye is covered by two distinct epithelial populations, the conjunctival and corneal epithelia. The stem cell population for the corneal epithelia has been found to be located at the area known as the limbus. This is a narrow ring of tissue at the transitional zone between the cornea and conjunctiva. This stem cell population is responsible for generating transient amplifying cells which are responsible for renewing the cornea epithelia. There are currently no definitive markers for the stem cell population in the limbus. Instead using morphological features, such as small cells with a high nucleus-to-cytoplasm ratio, in conjunction with the presence of certain markers e.g. DeltaNP63alpha and the absence of others, e.g. the cytokeratin pair 3 & 12, are taken as being indicative of the stem cell population. Damage can occur to the corneal epithelium due to a number of causes including, Steven-Johnson syndrome, and chemical or thermal burns. This results in invasion of the cornea by the conjunctival epithelium resulting in impaired vision. In 1997 Pellegrini et al. (Lancet 349, 990) successfully used cells sheets from cultured limbal cells to successfully treat patients with corneal damage. Since then several other groups, have successfully treated patients, using similar methods.

Identifiers

PMID19003195
PMCPMC2267622

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.