ArticleInternational ophthalmology2022
Results of a novel surgical technique for iridodialysis repair using an iris retractor segment.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo describe a novel surgical technique for iridodialysis repair using an iris retractor segment and report its clinical results.
methodsFifty-three eyes of 53 patients who underwent iridodialysis repair using an iris retractor segment were enrolled in this retrospective study. Data recorded from patient files consisted of age, sex, degree of iridodialysis, surgical techniques, number of segments used, preoperative and postoperative corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), intraocular pressure (IOP), complications, and follow-up time.
resultsMean follow-up time was 34.4 months. The subjects included 29 men (54.7%) and 26 women (45.3%), and the mean age was 56.6 ± 14.0 years. According to the degree of iridodialysis, the patients were divided into Group 1 (60°-89°, n = 19) and Group 2 (90°-270°, n = 34). During the iridodialysis repair for Group 1, a single segment was sufficient; however, in Group 2, one segment was used in 18 eyes (52.9%), two segments in 15 eyes (44.1%), and three segments in one eye (2.9%). The pre- and postoperative last control CDVA value in Group 2 was significantly lower than in Group 1. The pre- and postoperative IOPs for Group 2 were significantly higher than Group 1.
conclusionIridodialysis repair using an iris retractor segment is a minimally invasive technique and found to be safe and effective. It will be a good option for patients with large iridodialysis, as it avoids excessive surgical manipulations and prolonged surgical time.
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.