ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2020
Clinical Outcomes of Toric Intraocular Lenses: Differences in Expected Outcomes When Using a Calculator That Considers Effective Lens Position and the Posterior Cornea vs One That Does Not.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Toric Versus non-toric intraocular lenses for pre-existing corneal astigmatism: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Astigmatism Management with Astigmatism-Correcting Intraocular Lens Using Two Toric Calculators - A Comparative Case Series.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2021Article
- Predictability of Residual Postoperative Astigmatism After Implantation of a Toric Intraocular Lens Using Two Different Calculators.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare toric intraocular lens (IOL) outcome accuracy after using an online toric calculator that accounted for posterior corneal astigmatism versus a traditional calculator that only accounted for anterior corneal astigmatism. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis was a single-arm, non-masked, non-randomized prospective study in a single private practice in Norfolk, Virginia, USA, evaluating clinical outcomes of toric IOL implantation based on a calculator that considered posterior corneal astigmatism (PCA) and effective lens position (ELP). Of interest was the distribution of the residual refraction (sphere and cylinder) at 40-70 days postoperative. Residual refractive cylinder (RRC) was compared to the back-calculated theoretical results using a legacy calculator that did not consider PCA. Distance visual acuity (best-corrected and uncorrected) and the manifest refraction were also measured, along with preoperative and postoperative keratometry.
resultsForty-six eyes of 34 subjects were available for analysis. All eyes had a spherical equivalent refraction within 0.5D of intended. Uncorrected visual acuity was 20/25 or better in 86% of eyes targeted for emmetropia. Residual cylinder was 0.50D or less in 96% of eyes, with a maximum of 0.75D measured. The difference between residual cylinder and the expected cylinder from calculations was significantly lower for the calculator that included consideration of PCA and ELP relative to the one that did not.
conclusionUse of a toric IOL calculator that includes consideration of posterior corneal astigmatism is recommended to optimize clinical outcomes.
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.