Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31925516›Full record

ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2020

Comparison of postoperative refractive outcome in eyes undergoing combined phacovitrectomy vs cataract surgery following vitrectomy.

Paris G Tranos, Bruce Allan, Miltiadis Balidis, Athanasios Vakalis, Solon Asteriades, George Anogeianakis, Magda Triantafilla, Nikolaos Kozeis, Panagiotis Stavrakas

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Prognostic factors of idiopathic epiretinal membrane surgery and evolution of alterations of the central cone bouquet.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Paris G TranosOphthalmica Eye Institute, 196 Vassilisis Olgas Street, 54655, Thessaloniki, Greece. tranos@ophthalmica.gr.
Bruce AllanMoorfields Eye Hospital, London, UK.
Miltiadis BalidisOphthalmica Eye Institute, 196 Vassilisis Olgas Street, 54655, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Athanasios VakalisOphthalmica Eye Institute, 196 Vassilisis Olgas Street, 54655, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Solon AsteriadesOphthalmica Eye Institute, 196 Vassilisis Olgas Street, 54655, Thessaloniki, Greece.
George AnogeianakisLeicester Royal Infirmary, Leicester, UK.
Magda TriantafillaOphthalmica Eye Institute, 196 Vassilisis Olgas Street, 54655, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Nikolaos KozeisOphthalmica Eye Institute, 196 Vassilisis Olgas Street, 54655, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Panagiotis StavrakasDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Patras Medical School, Patras, Greece.
Athens Eye Hospital · GRLeicester Royal Infirmary · GBUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Patras · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo investigate the accuracy of preoperative biometry in eyes undergoing combined phacovitrectomy and to compare it with eyes having cataract surgery at a later point in time following vitrectomy.

methodsPatients with epiretinal membrane or macular hole who underwent combined phacovitrectomy (group 1) or phacoemulsification following pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) (group 2) were included in this retrospective, comparative, interventional case series. The primary outcome measures were the intraocular lens power prediction error (PE) and the percentage of eyes with PE > ± 0.5D in the two groups. Secondary outcome measures included the correlation between epidemiological, clinical, or surgical factors and dioptric shift. In addition, the influence of optical coherence tomography characteristics to the PE was investigated.

resultsGroup 1 and 2 consisted of 55 and 54 eyes, respectively, for a total of 109 eyes included in the study. The mean absolute PE was 0.59 D (range + 1.4 to - 2.5D) in group 1 and 0.35 (range + 1.0 to - 1.45D) in group 2 (p = 0.01). PE greater than 0.5D was observed in 47% of eyes in group 1 as opposed to 16.6% of eyes in group 2 (p = 0.027). The PE was associated with shallower anterior chamber depth (ACD), increased central macular thickness (> 300 μ), and worse baseline best-corrected visual acuity. Photoreceptor ellipsoid zone or external limiting membrane disruption was not associated with significantly greater postoperative refractive deviations.

conclusionCombined phacovitrectomy may result in greater postoperative refractive prediction error compared to phacoemulsification alone following vitrectomy. Patients with worse vision, greater central macular thickness, and shallow anterior chambers require more caution since they are prone to inaccurate preoperative biometry.

Indexed as

PhacoemulsificationVitrectomyAgedBiometryCataractEpiretinal MembraneFemaleHumansIntraocular PressureLens Implantation, IntraocularMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative PeriodPseudophakiaRefraction, OcularReproducibility of ResultsEpiretinal membraneMacular holePhacovitrectomyPrediction errorRefractive errorVitrectomy

Identifiers

PMID31925516
OpenAlexW3000492053

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.