Trial reportIndian journal of ophthalmology2020
Comparative clinical trial of intracameral ropivacaine vs. lignocaine in subjects undergoing phacoemulsification under augmented topical anesthesia.
Trial report in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacologic interventions for mydriasis in cataract surgery.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Topical and subconjunctival anesthesia versus topical anesthesia alone in patients with senile cataracts undergoing phacoemulsification: a double-blind randomized controlled trial.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Trial
- Utilization of the CONSORT checklist to enhance clinical trials reporting - A critical analysis.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare intracameral Ropivacaine to Lignocaine during phacoemulsification under augmented topical anesthesia, in terms of efficacy and safety. Methods: This prospective, randomized, double-masked clinical trial included subjects planned for phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens implantation for visually significant uncomplicated senile cataract, under augmented topical anesthesia. Cases were randomized into two groups, Group A (Ropivacaine 0.1%) or Group B (Lignocaine 1.0%). The pain experienced by the patients during the surgery, mydriasis, post-op inflammation and endothelial cell change at six weeks after the procedure was evaluated. Surgeon's feedback was recorded to evaluate the cooperation of the patient during surgery. Results: A total of 210 subjects were screened and 184 were randomized to have 92 subjects in each group. There was no statistically significant difference seen on comparing Group A and B with respect to Age (P = 0.05), painful surgical steps (P = 0.85), visual analog scale scores (P = 0.65), surgeon's score (P = 0.11), postoperative inflammation (P = 0.90) and average ultrasound time during phacoemulsification (P = 0.10). Subjects in Group A fared better when compared to Group B with respect to endothelial cell loss (P = 0.0008), and augmentation in mydriasis (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Intracameral Ropivacaine and Lignocaine, both are equally effective in providing analgesia during phacoemulsification. However, intracameral Ropivacaine is superior to Lignocaine with regards to corneal endothelial cell safety, and augmenting mydriasis.
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.