ArticleScientific reports2022
Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery after corneal refractive surgery.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors Associated With Postoperative Outcomes in Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery.Cureus · 2025Article
- A Comparative Study of the Effect of Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery on Corneal Astigmatism in Post-LASIK Eyes and Virgin Eyes.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Article
- FLACS combined with IOLI is comparable to Phaco combined with IOLI in cataract patients after refractive surgery.American journal of translational research · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cataract is the leading cause of blindness worldwide, and advanced cataract techniques such as femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) have been commercially available. Corneal refractive surgery (CRS) is one of the most popular surgeries for the correction of refractive errors. CRS changes the cornea not only anatomically but also pathophysiologically. However, there has been no clinical research analyzing the refractive and safety outcomes of FLACS after CRS. The aim of this retrospective chart review and comparative study is to evaluate the effect and safety of FLACS after CRS comparing with conventional PCS. Participants with a previous CRS history who underwent FLACS or conventional PCS were included in this study. The visual outcomes and the refractive outcomes including refractive, corneal, and ocular residual astigmatism were compared. The safety outcomes were then studied intraoperatively and postoperatively. A total of 102 patients with age-related cataract were enrolled. At 3 months postoperatively, UCVA, BCVA, and predictive error were not significantly different between the FLACS and conventional PCS groups. Reduction of refractive astigmatism was higher in FLACS. Postoperative ORA was significant lower in FLACS. Reduction of ORA was higher in FLACS. The intraoperative and postoperative complications were also not significantly different between the two groups. FLACS could effectively change refractive astigmatism and ORA; without more complications than conventional PCS. FLACS' competitive edge in postoperative ORA may provide better visual quality than conventional PCS in patients with a previous history of CRS.
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.