ArticleJournal of ophthalmology2021
Combined Corneal Cross-Linking and Myoring Implantation in Advanced Keratoconus: Femtosecond Laser versus Manual Dissection.
Article in Journal of ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Femtosecond laser-assisted intracorneal MyoRing explantation - A novel rescue technique.American journal of ophthalmology case reports · 2025Article
- Intrastromal Corneal Ring Segment Implantation in a Patient with the Bowman Layer Inlay Transplantation for Keratoconus.Case reports in ophthalmological medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntrastromal corneal ring segments are widely adopted for keratoconus management. However, the complete ring (Myoring) was proposed to be superior in advanced cases. Myoring can be implanted either via femtoassisted or manual dissection techniques. A comparison between both techniques can delineate any differences in the outcomes.
methodsThis was a prospective interventional case series study. Sixty-four eyes with progressive advanced keratoconus were enrolled: 36 and 28 had femtoassisted or manual Myoring, respectively. Uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), maximal keratometry (
resultsFemtoassisted Myoring dissection significantly improved UCVA and CDVA from 0.1 ± 0.06 and 0.18 ± 0.1 preoperatively to 0.29 ± 0.08 and 0.43 ± 0.1 at 12 months. Also, manual technique similarly enhanced UCVA and CDVA from 0.11 ± 0.05 and 0.2 ± 0.1 preoperatively to 0.27 ± 0.2 and 0.4 ± 0.2 at 12 months. In terms of safety, while no cases of ring extrusion were encountered with the femtoassisted technique, six (21.4%) cases of extrusion were encountered in the manual group.
conclusionFemtoassisted or manual Myoring technique followed by CXL is an effective choice for advanced progressive keratoconus. Although it did not reach a statistical significance, the high extrusion rate with manual dissection is a red flag to be considered.
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.