Michael W Belin1, Jose L Güell, Günther Grabner. 1. *Department of Ophthalmology and Vision Science, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ; †Autònoma University of Barcelona, Instituto Microcirugia Ocular (IMO), Barcelona, Spain; and ‡Paracelsus Medical University, Department of Ophthalmology, Salzburg, Austria.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To propose a series of standardized guidelines for reporting keratoprosthesis (KPRO) results. METHODS: At the most recent KPRO Study Group Meeting (Barcelona, 2015), representatives of the 4 multinational corneal societies (Cornea Society, Asia Cornea Society, EuCornea, and PanCornea) and the KPRO Study Group agreed to propose consistent terminology for reporting KPRO results, especially in describing the length of follow-up and in the description of the KPRO itself. Consensus was reached for minimal reporting guidelines. RESULTS: The 4 multinational corneal societies and the KPRO Study Group agreed to standardized terminology for reporting the length of follow-up, preoperative diagnosis grouping, and data stratification based on the KPRO type used. CONCLUSIONS: Guidelines suggesting minimal reporting standards will assist in both data collection and reporting and will allow for better comparative analysis and pooling of the available data.
PURPOSE: To propose a series of standardized guidelines for reporting keratoprosthesis (KPRO) results. METHODS: At the most recent KPRO Study Group Meeting (Barcelona, 2015), representatives of the 4 multinational corneal societies (Cornea Society, Asia Cornea Society, EuCornea, and PanCornea) and the KPRO Study Group agreed to propose consistent terminology for reporting KPRO results, especially in describing the length of follow-up and in the description of the KPRO itself. Consensus was reached for minimal reporting guidelines. RESULTS: The 4 multinational corneal societies and the KPRO Study Group agreed to standardized terminology for reporting the length of follow-up, preoperative diagnosis grouping, and data stratification based on the KPRO type used. CONCLUSIONS: Guidelines suggesting minimal reporting standards will assist in both data collection and reporting and will allow for better comparative analysis and pooling of the available data.
Authors: Kai B Kang; Faris I Karas; Ruju Rai; Joelle A Hallak; Joann J Kang; Jose de la Cruz; Maria S Cortina Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-02-06 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ariann Dyer; Alix De Faria; Gemma Julio; Juan Álvarez de Toledo; Rafael I Barraquer; Maria Fideliz de la Paz Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2021-09-30
Authors: Otavio de Azevedo Magalhães; Rafael Jorge Alves de Alcantara; José Alvaro Pereira Gomes; Jarbas Caiado de Castro Neto; Paulo Schor Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2022-08-01 Impact factor: 3.048