ArticleMedical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal2016
Full-ring Intrastromal Corneal Implantation for Correcting High Myopia in Patients with Severe Keratoconus.
Article in Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of design parameters on the outcome of intrastromal ring surgery using biomechanical simulations.PloS one · 2024Article
- Combined Corneal Cross-Linking and Myoring Implantation in Advanced Keratoconus: Femtosecond Laser versus Manual Dissection.Journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Corneal Biomechanics After Intrastromal Ring Surgery: Optomechanical In Silico Assessment.Translational vision science & technology · 2020Article
- Comparison of the MyoRing implantation depth by mechanical dissection using PocketMaker microkeratome versus Melles hook via AS-OCT.BMC ophthalmology · 2018Article
- Contralateral eye study of refractive, topographic and aberrometric outcomes after femtosecond assisted MyoRing implantation and DALK for management of keratoconus.International journal of ophthalmology · 2018Article
- Consanguineous Marriage as a Risk Factor for Developing Keratoconus.Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal · 2018Article
- Characteristics of Astigmatism after MyoRing Implantation.Medical hypothesis, discovery & innovation ophthalmology journal · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of the mechanical implantation of a MyoRing in patients with severe keratoconus and high myopia. The study involved 32 eyes of 32 patients (14 men and 18 women; mean age: 29.6 ± 6.7; age range: 20 - 44). The patients underwent MyoRing implantation with mechanical dissection using a Pocket Maker microkeratome, and outcomes were assessedat3 months after surgery. The main outcome measures were uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity (UDVA and CDVA, both in Logarithm of the Minimum Angle of Resolution [logMAR] units), manifest refraction, and keratometry readings. There was a significant improvement in the UDVA, from 1.14 ± 0.32 to 0.35 ± 0.24 (P ˂ 0.001), and in the CDVA, from 0.47 ± 0.20 to 0.22 ± 0.15 (P ˂ 0.001). There was also a significant improvement in the spherical equivalent refractive error (-10.51 ± 2.81 D to -1.32 ± 2.29 D) (P ˂ 0.001). There was a significant decrease of manifest refraction in the mean sphere and cylinder of 7.70 and 2.6 D, respectively (P < 0.001). Furthermore, with regard to corneal topography, there was a significant reduction of 3.55 D (P ˂ 0.001) in the mean keratometry reading. The results show that the mechanical implantation of a MyoRing is effective for the correction of myopia in patients with keratoconus and high myopia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28293654PMC5347213W2980334565What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.