ArticlePloS one2022
Comparison of two one-piece acrylic foldable intraocular lenses: Short-term change in axial movement after cataract surgery and its effect on refraction.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Anterior Chamber Depth Changes of Two Hydrophobic Acrylic Intraocular Lenses in the Capsular Bag: A Prospective, Randomized, Contralateral Eye, Multicenter Study.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Trial
- Effects of postoperative inflammation on visual and refractive recovery after cataract surgery: role of subconjunctival dexamethasone.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026Article
- Potential Refractive Error Due to Axial Displacement of Intraocular Lenses with Clinically Relevant Compression Diameters.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Article
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the change in intraocular lens (IOL) axial movement, corneal power, and postoperative refraction of eyes implanted with two different single-piece, open loop, acrylic foldable IOLs with planar-haptic design: one IOL with hinges vs. one IOL without hinges. The role of IOL axial movement on short-term refractive shift after cataract surgery was also evaluated.
methodsThis retrospective comparative study enrolled consecutive patients who had phacoemulsification with aspheric IOL implantation. The IOL depth (the distance from corneal endothelium to IOL surface) and corneal power were measured via anterior-segment optical coherence tomography at 4 days and 1 month postoperatively. The changes in axial movement of the IOL, corneal power, and manifest refractive spherical equivalent (MRSE) were compared among groups, and the correlations between each lens were evaluated.
resultsIOL with hinges was implanted in 42 eyes of 42 patients and IOL without hinges was implanted in 42 eyes of 42 patients. The change in axial movement between 4 days and 1 month was significantly smaller in the IOL with hinges group than in the IOL without hinges group (p < 0.001). The axial movement of IOL with hinges did not correlate with the MRSE change; however, the forward shift of IOL without hinges correlated with the myopic refractive change (Pearson r = 0.62, p < 0.001).
conclusionThe postoperative axial movement of IOL was more stable in the IOL with hinges group than the IOL without hinges group between 4 days and 1 month after cataract surgery. Even though the two study IOLs with planar-haptic design are made of similar acrylic materials, other characteristics such as hinge structure may affect IOL stability in the bag.
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.