Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35123431›Full record

ArticleBMC ophthalmology2022

Outcomes of four-point suture fixated and two-point sutureless posterior chamber IOLs combined with pars plana vitrectomy.

Mariya Zyablitskaya, Estee Hong, Royce W S Chen, Stanley Chang, Leejee H Suh

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Real-world outcomes of scleral-fixated intraocular lens: a multi-surgeon study comparing four-point fixation and flanged intrascleral haptic fixation techniques.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Mariya ZyablitskayaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Edward S. Harkness Eye Institute, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, 635 West 165th Street, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Estee HongDepartment of Ophthalmology, Edward S. Harkness Eye Institute, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, 635 West 165th Street, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Royce W S ChenDepartment of Ophthalmology, Edward S. Harkness Eye Institute, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, 635 West 165th Street, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Stanley ChangDepartment of Ophthalmology, Edward S. Harkness Eye Institute, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, 635 West 165th Street, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Leejee H SuhDepartment of Ophthalmology, Edward S. Harkness Eye Institute, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, 635 West 165th Street, New York, NY, 10032, USA. lhs2118@cumc.columbia.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile each scleral fixation method has its own advantages, there is a lack of strong evidence to suggest a superior technique. Advances in cataract surgery expand patient eligibility for successful cataract extraction, benefitting a growing population of pseudophakic patients. However, implantation of secondary intraocular lens (IOL) with compromised anterior or posterior capsule is a more challenging task. Each method of scleral fixation has its own advantages and none of them has strong evidence to be superior. This paper describes postsurgical outcomes of two scleral intraocular(IOL) fixation techniques combined with pars plana vitrectomy(PPV) from a single tertiary referral eye center.

methodsPatients underwent PPV and IOL implantation with either four-point sutured scleral fixation (Akreos AO60(AK); n = 24) or two-point sutureless flanged intrascleral fixation (CT Lucia(CTL); n = 7). Reports include IOL and sclerotomy placement, fixation techniques, and IOL model.

resultsThirty-one eyes of thirty patients were analyzed. Average change in vision from baseline measurement was LogMAR - 0.68 ± 0.66 and - 0.90 ± 0.63 for AK and CTL groups, respectively. Average postoperative refractive error was - 0.3 ± 1.03 D (AK) and 0.4 ± 0.60 D (CTL). No opacification cases of Akreos lens were found in this study with the longest follow up of 53 months.

conclusionsBoth methods of implantation (sutured and sutureless) could provide good visual and refractive outcomes. Minimal complication rates were reported despite including patients with multiple comorbidities, making both techniques an attractive choice for secondary IOL implantation.

Indexed as

Lenses, IntraocularVitrectomyHumansLens Implantation, IntraocularPostoperative ComplicationsRefraction, OcularRetrospective StudiesScleraSuturesSuture TechniquesAkreos AO60 lensCT-Lucia 602 lensFlanged IOL fixationGore-tex suture fixationPars plana vitrectomyPosterior chamber IOLSecondary IOL implantationSutureless IOL fixation

Identifiers

PMID35123431
PMCPMC8818229

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.