ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2023
Clinical observation of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery for diabetic cataract.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Effect of Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Versus Conventional Clear Corneal Incisions on Endothelial Cell Density and Surgical Efficiency in Cataract Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Between Femtosecond Laser-assisted Cataract Surgery and Phacoemulsification in Patients with Diabetes: A Systematic Review.Journal of ophthalmic & vision research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo observe the clinical efficacy of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) for diabetic cataract (DC).
methodsOne hundred and seven cases of DC admitted between August 2018 and August 2021 were enrolled, and their clinical data were retrospectively analyzed. Of them, 53 cases treated with conventional phacoemulsification (Phaco) cataract surgery (CPS) were set as the control group (the Con) and 54 cases receiving FLACS were set as the observation group (the Obs). Clinical data such as effective phaco time (EPT), color doppler energy (CDE), best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), visual quality, corneal endothelial cell (CEC) count (CECC), and complication rate were compared and analyzed. Finally, multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed to analyze the prognostic factors based on the incidence of complications in DC patients.
resultsThe Obs had significantly lower EPT and CDE compared to the Con, as well as markedly elevated BCVA and visual quality at one month after operation compared to the preoperative levels and the Con. The CECC of the Obs differed insignificantly from that before surgery and was higher versus the Con. Moreover, the incidence of postoperative complications (corneal edema, fibrin exudation, pigment dispersion, and posterior synechia of the iris) was lower in the Obs. Moreover, the treatment method was an independent prognostic factor affecting the prognosis of DC patients.
conclusionsThe above analysis suggests the superior efficacy of FLACS to CPS for DC, as it can more significantly reduce EPT, CDE, CEC loss, and the incidence of postoperative complications with a positive effect on improving BCVA, visual quality, and patient prognosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36777870PMC9908458What 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.