ArticleCureus2021
Expected vs. Actual Refractive Error in Patients Presenting With Phacomorphic Glaucoma.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim Phacomorphic glaucoma (PG) is a rare but clinically significant presentation requiring emergent cataract surgery. We chose to investigate whether the expected refractive error based on the intraocular lens (IOL) calculations differed from the expected refractive outcome post-surgery. Materials & Methods A retrospective analysis of patients with PG between 2009 to 2018 who underwent cataract surgery and had postoperative refraction was included. Information collected included presenting and postoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), intraocular pressure (IOP) pre- and postoperatively, and the presence of corneal edema. Predicted spherical equivalence (SphEq) data was collected from IOL calculations, and postoperative SphEq was calculated from postoperative manifest refraction. Results Twenty patients with PG who underwent cataract surgery were identified; of these, 10 patients and 10 eyes who underwent manifest refraction post-op were included. Mean BCVA at presentation was 20/544 [Logarithm of Minimal Angle of Resolution (LogMAR) 1.44], and mean pre-op IOP was elevated at 24.6 ± 14.2 mmHg. Mean BCVA measured at one month post-op improved to 20/192 (LogMAR 0.983). Mean IOP decreased to 19 ± 8.8 mmHg at one month post-op. The mean difference between the predicted and actual refractive error, as calculated by SphEq was -0.088 (p=0.570). Conclusion The study shows an improvement in visual acuity and IOP post-cataract surgery in patients with PG, as would be expected. The study also demonstrates that patients ended up with a slightly more myopic refractive error than expected postoperatively, and illustrates the clinical variability in postoperative refractive outcomes from a large standard deviation. This is a new and clinically important finding, although not statistically significant, that has not been previously published.
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.