Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35452094›Full record

ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2022

A Comprehensive Investigation of Contrast Sensitivity and Disk Halo in High Myopia Treated With SMILE and EVO Implantable Collamer Lens Implantation.

Wuxiao Zhao, Jing Zhao, Tian Han, Jifang Wang, Zhe Zhang, Xingtao Zhou

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The visual quality of patients with myopia and presbyopia after ICL V4c implantation and FS-LASIK using monovision design.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Wuxiao ZhaoEye Institute and Department of Ophthalmology, Eye & ENT Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Jing ZhaoEye Institute and Department of Ophthalmology, Eye & ENT Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Tian HanEye Institute and Department of Ophthalmology, Eye & ENT Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Jifang WangEye Institute and Department of Ophthalmology, Eye & ENT Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Zhe ZhangEye Institute and Department of Ophthalmology, Eye & ENT Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Xingtao ZhouEye Institute and Department of Ophthalmology, Eye & ENT Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Shanghai Clinical Research Center · CNFudan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the clinical outcomes in small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) and EVO implantable Collamer lens (ICL)-treated high myopia. Methods: Thirty-three SMILE-treated and 32 EVO ICL-treated patients were included and followed up for 6 months. Subjective refraction, contrast sensitivity, and disk halo size were measured preoperatively and postoperatively. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were obtained at the final visit. Results: Significant differences in efficacy and safety indices were observed between the SMILE and EVO ICL groups at 6 months postoperatively (P < 0.05). In the SMILE group, the mesopic contrast sensitivity at 2.2 cycles per degree (cpd) and photopic contrast sensitivity at 0.5, 3.4, and 7.1 cpd were significantly improved. In the EVO ICL group, the mesopic contrast sensitivity at 7.1 cpd and photopic contrast sensitivity at 0.5, 7.1, and 14.6 cpd were significantly improved. The halo radii after SMILE were significantly increased at 1 week, showed a decreasing trend at 1 month, returned to baseline at 3 months, and progressed stably at 6 months. However, it was unchanged in the EVO ICL group. Regarding subjective experience, haloes were the most common disturbance with mild and little bothersomeness after EVO ICL in contrast to starbursts after SMILE. Conclusions: EVO ICL implantation yielded better visual outcomes, improved contrast sensitivity particularly at high spatial frequencies, had a stabler disk halo size, and increased incidence of haloes, with less influence than that of SMILE. Translational Relevance: The disk halo and PRO findings will be of benefit for consultations and evaluations in visual performance and disturbances.

Indexed as

MyopiaSurgical WoundContrast SensitivityHumansRefraction, OcularTreatment OutcomeVisual Acuity

Identifiers

PMID35452094
PMCPMC9055559
OpenAlexW4224236497

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.