ArticleScientific reports2022
Ophthalmic viscosurgical device interaction with two hydrophobic acrylic intraocular lenses of different equilibrium water content.
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 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Randomized comparative multicenter study assessing two dispersive viscosurgical devices for cataract surgery.Journal of cataract and refractive surgery · 2026Trial
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 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ophthalmic viscosurgical device (OVD) is used during intraocular surgery to protect ocular tissue. It requires complete removal from the eye by the end of surgery to avoid postoperative complications. This study compares the interaction of a cohesive OVD with two different intraocular lenses (IOLs) of different equilibrium water content. In this laboratory study on porcine cadaver eyes, the capsular bags and anterior chambers of each eye were filled with fluorescein-stained OVD. Following implantation of 10 IOLs each of Clareon CNA0T0 and AcrySof SN60WF (Alcon Laboratory, Fort Worth, USA) IOLs, the OVD was removed using the irrigation/aspiration mode. The OVD removal was timed and differences between the both IOL groups were compared. OVD removal time ranged from 18 to 40 s (mean ± SD, 26.4 ± 6.8 s) and from 16 to 39 s (mean ± SD, 23.6 ± 6.6 s) for eyes implanted with a CNA0T0 and a SN60WF IOL, respectively, without a statistically significant difference between the groups, P > 0.05. Cohesive OVD removal times were similar between the CNA0T0 and SN60WF groups. Surgeons should experience no differences regarding the interaction between cohesive OVDs and IOLs made from the new Clareon material compared to the established AcrySof material.
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.