ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2021
Early results of circularity and centration of capsulotomy prepared by three different methods.
Article in International journal of ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Comparison of the clinical outcomes after manual capsulorhexis on one eye and precision pulse capsulotomy on the other eye.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025Article
- Stability of neodymium:YAG laser posterior capsulotomy in eyes with capsular tension rings.International journal of ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Comment on "Early results of circularity and centration of capsulotomy prepared by three different methods".International journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo compare the difference of capsulotomy produced by precision pulse capsulotomy (PPC), manual (M-CCC), and femtosecond laser assisted capsulotomy (FLAC) in relation to intraocular lens (IOL) centration, circularity and its effect on visual outcomes.
methodsProspective, non-randomized comparative study conducted at LV Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India. Sixty eyes of 52 patients were grouped into 3 (FLAC, PPC and M-CCC) based on capsulotomy techniques used. Twenty consecutive eyes with uneventful phacoemulsification and with no comorbidities affecting the capsulotomy or visual outcome were included in each group. The main outcome measure was IOL centration in relation to capsulotomy and pupil. Secondary outcome measures were post-operative visual acuity, manifest refraction and aberration profile between groups.
resultsAt 5wk the visual, refractive outcomes and endothelial cell density were comparable between the 3 groups. The median circularity index of FLAC was statistically significantly different to M-CCC or PPC (1-10) groups (
conclusionOur study shows that despite differences in the morphology of capsulotomy produced by PPC, M-CCC, FLAC a well-centered IOL can be achieved. The measured capsular morphology parameters do not affect visual 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.