Trial reportBMC ophthalmology2022
A prospective randomized self-controlled study of LASIK combined with accelerated cross-linking for high myopia in Chinese: 24-month follow-up.
Trial report in BMC ophthalmology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Corneal stability comparison between prophylactic cross-linking with laser refractive surgery technique versus laser refractive surgery technique alone for myopia: a meta-analysis.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review of the study design and statistical practices in randomized controlled trials on myopia treatment (2019-2023).BMC ophthalmology · 2025Pooled it
- Eight-year results of LASIK with or without combined accelerated crosslinking in highly myopic eyes.Journal of cataract and refractive surgery · 2026Trial
- Evaluation of stability and visual quality in Chinese myopic eyes 2 years following FS-LASIK combined with prophylactic corneal crosslinking.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of corneal stromal demarcation line depth after corneal collagen cross-linking with two different UV energy levels in keratoconus: a comparative study using AS-OCT andInternational journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Clinical outcomes of femtosecond laser-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis combined with accelerated corneal cross-linking versus standard femtosecond laser-assisted laser in situ keratomileusis for the correction of myopia and myopic astigmatism.International ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Visual outcomes and corneal biomechanical evaluation between LASIK and LASIK combined with accelerated corneal crosslinking.International journal of ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Development of interface haze after femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis with accelerated corneal crosslinking: a case series.International ophthalmology · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo assess the visual and refractive outcomes of femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK) concurrent with accelerated cross-linking (LASIK Xtra) compared with conventional FS-LASIK (convLASIK) for high myopia in Chinese individuals.
methodsIn this prospective, randomized, fellow-eye comparison study, 25 patients with high myopia were treated randomly with LASIK Xtra in one eye and convLASIK in the other. A 24-month follow-up was conducted, and the main outcome measures included uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE) and corneal tomography.
resultsThe UDVA was 0.09 ± 0.15 logMAR in the LASIK Xtra group, which was significantly worse than that in the convLASIK group 1 day postoperatively (P = .001), but the difference became nonsignificant from 1 week after surgery. The efficacy index was 0.88 ± 0.18 in the LASIK Xtra eyes and 0.99 ± 0.13 in the convLASIK eyes at 24 months (P = .028). Throughout the follow-up period, a slight myopic shift in the MRSE and keratometry values were observed in both groups without significant intergroup differences. The coefficient of determination was 0.9982 in the LASIK Xtra eyes and 0.9987 in the convLASIK eyes. The corneal density was significantly higher, and demarcation lines were visible in the first 6 months in LASIK Xtra eyes, but both signs of cross-linking gradually disappeared during follow-up. No severe complications were detected in either group.
conclusionsLASIK Xtra showed comparable safety and predictability with convLASIK for high myopia in Chinese, but lower efficacy and no greater stability was observed up to 24-month follow-up.
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.