BMJ open ophthalmology · 2025
Why take the eye? A systematic review of corneal retrieval methods and donor consent: implications for the UK.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Edwards Anya, Ao Jack, Bridson John D, Kaye Stephen B
Аннотация
AIM: To evaluate the effect of the corneal retrieval method on three outcome domains: donor consent rate, tissue quality and microbial contamination.
METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted using the Scopus, PubMed and Web of Science databases employing predefined search terms pertinent to corneal retrieval methods, consent rates, tissue quality and microbial contamination. Studies relevant to corneal donation and consent rates as well as reports comparing in situ corneal excision with whole-globe enucleation that evaluated at least one of the three primary outcome domains were included. This study adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.
RESULTS: 12 out of 91 studies met the inclusion criteria. In situ corneal excision is associated with higher rates of consent from the family members of the deceased. Corneas harvested via in situ excision were of comparable tissue quality to those obtained from enucleation. Additionally, contamination rates were similar.
CONCLUSIONS: In situ excision of corneal tissue may provide a potential advantage in donor acceptance, while offering comparable tissue quality and microbial safety.
METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted using the Scopus, PubMed and Web of Science databases employing predefined search terms pertinent to corneal retrieval methods, consent rates, tissue quality and microbial contamination. Studies relevant to corneal donation and consent rates as well as reports comparing in situ corneal excision with whole-globe enucleation that evaluated at least one of the three primary outcome domains were included. This study adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.
RESULTS: 12 out of 91 studies met the inclusion criteria. In situ corneal excision is associated with higher rates of consent from the family members of the deceased. Corneas harvested via in situ excision were of comparable tissue quality to those obtained from enucleation. Additionally, contamination rates were similar.
CONCLUSIONS: In situ excision of corneal tissue may provide a potential advantage in donor acceptance, while offering comparable tissue quality and microbial safety.