ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2021
Comparative analysis of the clinical outcomes between wavefront-guided and conventional femtosecond LASIK in myopia and myopia astigmatism.
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.
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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of clinical and patient-reported outcomes of contralateral topography-guided vs wavefront-guided LASIK.Journal of cataract and refractive surgery · 2026Trial
- One-Year Outcomes of Topography-Guided LASIK for Myopia and Astigmatism.Journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Impact of Pupil-Decentration on Visual and Refractive Outcomes in Myopic Patients Undergoing High Astigmatic PRK Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo compare the clinical outcomes of wavefront guided femtosecond LASIK (WFG LASIK) and conventional femtosecond LASIK (NWFG LASIK) in eyes with myopia and myopia astigmatism.
methodsThis was a retrospective, nonrandomized, comparative investigation enrolling 236 eyes of 122 patients (18-50y) with low & moderate and high myopia. The WFG group including 97 eyes (50 patients) undergone WFG LASIK and the NWFG group including 139 eyes (72 patients) undergone conventional LASIK. Mean efficacy index, high order aberrations (HOAs), pupil size and the quality of visual questionnaire were evaluated 6mo postoperatively.
resultsThere is no difference between WFG group (-0.054±0.049 in logMAR) and NWFG group (-0.040±0.056) in uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) postoperatively. The myopia astigmatism is higher in WFG group than that in NWFG group (
conclusionWFG and NWFG FS-LASIK are both effective and safe procedures to correct low & moderate and high myopia, but WFG FS-LASIK gives a better postoperative MEI, aberrometric control and predictable outcome. Meanwhile, WFG FS-LASIK is better than NWFG FS-LASIK in correction of myopia astigmatism. Low & moderate myopia allow better clinical outcomes than high myopia using any surgical method.
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.