ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2022
Early Outcomes of Two Treatment Modes of PresbyLASIK: Monocular vs. Micro-Monovision.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Presbyopia: Current Perspectives and Prospects for Patients.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026Review
- Exploring the Effect of Preoperative Stereopsis on Visual Outcomes in Hyperopic Presbyopes Treated with PresbyONDJournal of clinical medicine · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To report the visual, refractive and subjective outcomes of presbyLASIK for the correction of presbyopia. Methods: Monocular (20 eyes) or micro-monovision (12 eyes) presbyLASIK was performed on a total of 32 eyes in 16 patients (50% female, average age 55±4.6 years) using the Zeiss VisuMax 400Hz femtosecond and Schwind Amaris 1050RS excimer laser platform. Predictability, safety and efficacy were assessed and compared at 4-6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months. Results were considered significant if P < 0.05. Results: For monocular treatments, average postoperative spherical equivalent (SE) was 0.1±0.1 D and -0.86±0.5 D at 4-6 weeks postoperatively for distance and near eyes respectively; 90% eyes achieved SE ±1.0 D of the target. Postoperative binocular uncorrected distance (UDVA), intermediate (UIVA) and near visual acuity (UNVA) were -0.03±0.1 LogMAR (20/20), 0.09±0.26 LogMAR (N4) and 0.29±0.11 LogMAR (N6) respectively with 90% patients achieving binocular UDVA of 20/20 or better. For micro-monovision treatments, average postoperative SE was -0.33±0.51 D and -1.60±0.78 D at 4-6 weeks postoperatively for distance and near eyes respectively; 100% eyes achieved SE ±1.0 D of the target. Postoperative binocular UDVA, UIVA and UNVA were 0.05±0.16 LogMAR (20/20), -0.02±0.10 LogMAR (N3) and 0.23±0.08 LogMAR (N5) respectively with 67% patients achieving binocular UDVA of 20/20 or better. Conclusion: Monocular and micro-monovision presbyLASIK are both effective options for the treatment of presbyopia. Monocular treatments are more likely to be well tolerated by patients who prefer to preserve exceptional distance vision, while micro-monovision treatments may be better suited to patients who can tolerate compromises in distance vision in order to attain greater intermediate vision function.
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.