ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2022
Comparison of Three-Dimensional Surgical System Versus Binocular Microscope for Clear Corneal Incision in Cataract Surgery.
Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04839250 (Study on The Difference Between Three-Dimensional Heads-Up Surgery System and Traditional Surgery Methods in Cataract Surgery), which is not on this 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.
Study on The Difference Between Three-Dimensional Heads-Up Surgery System and Traditional Surgery Methods in Cataract Surgery
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of three-dimensional surgical system versus binocular microscope for implantable Collamer lens implantation: a randomized clinical trial.International journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTo compare surgical outcomes of 2.2 mm clear corneal incision (CCI) between a three-dimensional (3D) visualization system and traditional binocular microscope (BM) for phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation surgery.
methodsIn this randomized controlled clinical study, 60 eyes with age-related cataracts were divided into two groups receiving cataract surgery using either a 3D vision system (n = 30 eyes) (3D group) or a binocular microscope (n = 30 eyes) (BM group). We recorded and statistically analyzed surgical parameters and pre- and postoperative ocular parameters. Primary outcomes included the change in endothelial cell density (ECD) and CCI architecture, and secondary outcomes comprised other ocular parameters and surgical parameters. All procedures complied with the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki.
resultsOf the 60 eyes randomly assigned between January 5, 2021, and May 9, 2021, 55 (26 eyes in the 3D group and 29 eyes in the BM group) were analyzed. The ECD loss rate was 8.1% in the 3D group and 12.3% in the BM group, but the difference was not statistically significant. Local detachment of Descemet's membrane was seen in 50% (13 eyes, 3D group) and 51.6% (15 eyes, BM group), wound gaping at the endothelial side in 15.4% (four eyes, 3D group) and 10.3% (four eyes, BM group), gaping at the epithelial side in 11.5% (three eyes, 3D group) and 6.9% (two eyes, BM group), and misalignment of the incision in 3.4% (one eye, BM group) 1 day after surgery. These abnormalities improved with time. There was no difference between the 3D group and BM group in terms of other ocular parameters or surgical parameters before and after surgery.
conclusionsUsing the 3D surgical system for phacoemulsification and IOL implantation surgery seems to result in similar ECD and CCI conditions as using a conventional binocular microscope.
trial registrationThe protocol was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04839250).
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.