ArticleClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2019
Comparison of different surgical approaches for pediatric cataracts: complications and rates of additional surgery during long-term follow-up.
Article in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidence and risk factors of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment following paediatric cataract surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Acta ophthalmologica · 2025Pooled it
- Postoperative complications of pediatric cataract surgery and their comparison between limbal and pars plana approaches: a meta-analysis.Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia · 2025Pooled it
- Surgical Parameters and Prognostic Factors in Persistent Fetal Vasculature: Insights from a Retrospective Cohort Study.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2025Article
- Case Report: A Novel Mutation in the CRYGD Gene Causing Congenital Cataract Associated with Nystagmus in a Chinese Family.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Long-term results of in-the-bag primary intraocular lens implantation in children younger than 24 months.Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologiaArticle
- Surgical outcomes of primary intraocular lens implantation for the treatment of aphakia in pediatric cataracts in the Brazilian public health system.Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologiaArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedERRATA.2020
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare long-term postoperative complications of pediatric cataract surgery with primary intraocular lens (IOL) implantation associated with posterior capsulotomy (PC) and anterior vitrectomy (AV) between patients treated with a corneal or pars plicata/pars plana approach.
methodsChildren who underwent cataract surgery with in-the-bag primary IOL implantation were divided into two groups according to PC and AV surgical approach: a corneal approach (group 1) and a pars plicata/pars plana approach (group 2). Only patients with a follow-up duration of more than two years were included. Long-term surgical outcomes were retrospectively reported.
resultsThe mean follow-up period was 10.00±3.13 years. No cases of glaucoma or retinal detachment were reported. The mean age at surgery was 34.57±22.66 months. Forty-six children were included (27 eyes in group 1 and 29 eyes in group 2). The most frequent postoperative complication was corectopia, followed by visual axis opacification. Both complications occurred more frequently in group 1 (p<0.001). After cataract surgery, the rate of additional surgeries in group 1 was 51.9%, while in group 2, the rate was 27.6% (p=0.1132).
conclusionThe pars plicata/pars plana approach with PC and vitrectomy with primary in-the-bag IOL implantation for pediatric cataracts is a safe procedure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.