ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2022
Efficacy of a One-Piece Aberration Neutral Hydrophobic Acrylic Toric Intraocular Lens.
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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Outcomes of Robotic Laser Arcuate Keratotomy and Toric Intraocular Lenses for the Management of Lower Magnitude Astigmatism at the Time of Cataract Surgery.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Influence of decentration of plate-haptic toric intraocular lens on postoperative visual quality.BMC 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To assess the refractive outcomes, intraocular centration and rotational stability of the enVista toric intraocular lens (IOL). Patients and Methods: This study was a prospective, multi-centre, double-masked, partially randomized and partially controlled clinical trial. A total of 191 participants were implanted with toric IOL (1.25, 2.00, or 2.75D) or non-toric IOL (control). The lowest range of corneal astigmatic eyes were randomized to 1.25D toric or control. Higher astigmatic powers were allocated to the treatment arm. Subjects were assessed immediately postoperatively, 1-2 (V1), 7-14 (V2), 30-60 (V3) and 120-180 (V4) days postoperatively. Unaided (UDVA) and distance corrected visual acuity (CDVA), manifest refraction and corneal curvature were assessed. Vector analysis was used to calculate surgically induced refractive correction (SIRC), correction ratio (CR), error magnitude (EM) and error vector (EV). Slit-lamp photography was used to measure centration and rotational stability. Results: UDVA was better in the low toric IOL group in comparison with the control group at V4 (p<0.001). There was an undercorrection in the control group, whereas the average CR for all toric subjects was 1.00 ± 0.32: V2, 0.98 ± 0.34: V3 and 0.98 ± 0.35: V4. The absolute IOL rotational stability in comparison to the position of the IOL at V1 was 1.35° ± 0.97°: V2, 1.35° ± 1.07°: V3 and 1.38° ± 1.25°: V4. Decentration was generally inferior (V1: 0.04 ± 0.22mm, V2: 0.05± 0.20mm, V3: 0.08 ± 0.22mm, V4: 0.04 ± 0.21mm) and nasal (V1: 0.19 ± 0.23mm, V2: 0.20 ± 0.20mm, V3: 0.20 ± 0.21mm, V4: 0.17 ± 0.22mm). Conclusion: Participants with low levels of corneal astigmatism achieved superior vision and refractive outcomes in the low toric group over the control. Moderate and high levels of astigmatism achieved excellent refractive outcomes. The toric IOL demonstrated high levels of both rotational and centrational stability.
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.