Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28503439›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2017

Dry eye and corneal sensitivity after small incision lenticule extraction and femtosecond laser-assisted

Wen-Ting Cai, Qing-Yu Liu, Cheng-Da Ren, Qing-Quan Wei, Jun-Ling Liu, Qian-Yi Wang, Ya-Ru Du, Meng-Mei He, Jing Yu

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of ophthalmology, 2017. 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. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Complications of small incision lenticule extraction.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2020
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Dry Eyes After SMILE.Asia-Pacific journal of ophthalmology (Philadelphia, Pa.)
    Review
  18. Astigmatism Correction Using SMILE.Asia-Pacific journal of ophthalmology (Philadelphia, Pa.)
    Review
  19. 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

9 authors.

Wen-Ting CaiDepartment of Ophthalmology, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200072, China.
Qing-Yu LiuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200072, China.
Cheng-Da RenDepartment of Ophthalmology, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200072, China.
Qing-Quan WeiNanchang University, Nanchang 330031, Jiangxi Province, China.
Jun-Ling LiuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200072, China.
Qian-Yi WangDepartment of Ophthalmology, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200072, China.
Ya-Ru DuNanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210029, Jiangsu Province, China.
Meng-Mei HeDepartment of Ophthalmology, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200072, China.
Jing YuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University, School of Medicine, Shanghai 200072, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo assess the corneal sensitivity and the incidences of dry eye after small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and femtosecond laser-assisted

methodsThe Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3. We searched on PubMed from inception to March 2016. Summary weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to analyze the datum. Random-effects or fixed-effects models were chosen up to between-study heterogeneity. The main outcomes were composed of the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) scores, tear film break-up time (TBUT), Schirmer Test and corneal sensitivity.

resultsEight eligible studies including 772 eyes (386 in SMILE group and 386 in FS-LASIK group) were identified. The parameters have no significiant difference heterogeneity between SMILE and FS-LASIK group preoperatively. There were significant differences between the two groups in OSDI scores at one and three months postoperatively, in TBUT at one and three months postoperatively, in corneal sensitivity at one week, about one month and three months postoperatively. However, there was no significant difference observed in Schirmer Test at the follow-up periods.

conclusionCompare to FS-LASIK, dry eye and the corneal sensitivity recover better in the SMILE group, in first three months after the surgery.

Indexed as

corneal sensationdry eyefemtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusisMeta-analysissmall incision lenticule extraction

Identifiers

PMID28503439
PMCPMC5406644

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.