ArticleClinical & experimental ophthalmology2022
Endocapsular artificial iris implantation for iris defects: Reducing symptoms, restoring visual function and improving cosmesis.
Article in Clinical & experimental ophthalmology, 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Change in refractive outcomes after custom, flexible iris prostheses placed secondarily within the capsular bag.Journal of cataract and refractive surgery · 2026Article
- Endocapsular artificial iris implantation for iris defects: Reducing symptoms, restoring visual function and improving cosmesis.Clinical & experimental ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Biopsy of Iris and Anterior Chamber Tumours: Fine Needle, Minimally Invasive and Excision Techniques - Review.Clinical & experimental ophthalmologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo investigate repair of iris defects by endocapsular implantation of an artificial iris, in relation to visual outcomes, safety profile and patient satisfaction.
methodsRetrospective, consecutive case series from Greenlane tertiary teaching hospital and Eye Institute, Auckland, New Zealand. Medical records of patients implanted with an endocapsular artificial iris were reviewed and followed for minimum 3 months. Patient characteristics, surgical management, clinical outcomes and subjective responses were recorded.
resultsNineteen artificial irises were implanted in 18 patients. Etiologies were iris melanotic lesion excision (73.7%), trauma (10.5%), congenital aniridia (10.5%) and Urrets-Zavalia syndrome (5.3%). During postoperative follow-up [14.1 ± 12.4 months (range: 3 to 59 months)], best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and intraocular pressure (IOP) did not change significantly [BCVA, 0.23 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) (20/32 Snellen) preoperatively vs. 0.18 logMAR postoperatively (20/25 Snellen) (Z = -0.222, p = 0.824); IOP, 15 mmHg preoperatively vs. 17 mmHg postoperatively (Z = 1.377, p = 0.1447)]. Mild or self-limiting complications included: elevated IOP (42.1%), cystoid macular oedema (15.8%); persisting postoperative uveitis (15.8%) and minor vaulting of the prosthesis (15.7%). Moderate or severe complications included significant vaulting of prosthesis requiring surgical revision (5.3%) and a single eye (5.3%) with trabeculectomy and corneal graft failure. 94.4% of patients were very satisfied with the cosmesis and would be highly likely to have the procedure again.
conclusionsThis study confirms that endocapsular insertion of an artificial iris is typically associated with good functional and cosmetic results and a relatively low risk of significant complications.
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.