Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 30, 2026
Intravenous and Intra-amniotic In Utero Transplantation in the Murine Model
Published on: October 9, 2018
Effectiveness of Cryopreserved Amniotic Membrane Transplantation in Corneal Ulceration: A Meta-Analysis
Jinghua Liu1, Linghan Li1, Xuan Li1,2,3
1Clinical College of Ophthalmology, Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, China.
Purpose:
To evaluate the effectiveness of cryopreserved amniotic membrane transplantation (AMT) in corneal ulceration.
Methods:
The following electronic databases were searched: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. We evaluated the corneal epithelium healing rate (CEHR) and vision improvement rate (VIR) after AMT in the treatment of corneal ulceration. We analyzed the differences in the CEHR and VIR between the 2 groups of infective and noninfective corneal ulcerations. Subgroup analysis for the CEHR and VIR was performed based on the surgical methods. There were 3 subgroups: single-layered inlay, multilayered inlay, and sandwich (SAN). The differences were tested by referring to the Cochrane Handbook. Pooled estimates were determined with STATA software, version 15.
Results:
Eighteen eligible studies reporting the outcomes in 390 eyes of 385 patients were included. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the pooled CEHR was 97% (I = 37.9%, 95% confidence interval: 0.94-0.99, P = 0.089). The pooled VIR was 53% (I = 68.1%, 95% confidence interval: 0.42-0.65, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in either the CEHR or the VIR between the 2 groups of infective and noninfective corneal ulcerations. Among the 3 subgroups of single-layered inlay, multilayered inlay, and SAN, the differences in both CEHR and VIR were statistically significant.
Conclusions:
Consistent with many published reports, this meta-analysis also concluded that AMT was effective in the treatment of corneal ulceration. The curative effect of AMT was not different between the infective and noninfective corneal ulcerations. The differences in both CEHR and VIR were statistically significant among the subgroups.
Related Concept Videos
01:09Directing Effect of Substituents: meta-Directing Groups
01:28Peptic Ulcer Disease II: Pathophysiology
Damaging agents such as Helicobacter pylori, gastric acid, pepsin, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can weaken the mucosal defense, allowing hydrogen ions to infiltrate back and harm epithelial cells.
01:30Peptic Ulcer Disease I: Introduction
An acute ulcer, marked by superficial erosion and minimal inflammation, swiftly resolves upon identifying and addressing the underlying cause. In contrast, a chronic ulcer persists, potentially eroding through the muscular wall and forming fibrous tissue.
Peptic ulcers can also be...
01:26Peptic Ulcer Disease IV: Management
The therapeutic approach involves ensuring adequate rest, implementing drug therapy, promoting smoking cessation, making dietary modifications, and emphasizing long-term follow-up care.
Pharmacological management
The prevailing therapy for peptic ulcers involves a combination of managing the patient's current...
01:29Drugs for Treatment of Ulcerative Colitis in IBD
01:27Inflammatory Bowel Disease I: Ulcerative Colitis
Inflammatory bowel disease, or IBD, encompasses a group of disorders characterized by chronic inflammation or ulceration of the gastrointestinal tract.
Risk Factors
The exact cause of IBD remains unclear, although it is believed to be due to a mix of genetic, environmental, microbial, and immune factors. Genetic factors are significant in determining susceptibility to IBD, with family history being a critical risk factor. Individuals with a first-degree relative who has IBD are at...