Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37008289›Full record

ArticleJournal of vitreoretinal diseases

Air vs Gas Tamponade During Macular Hole Repair Surgery.

Shriji N Patel, Janice Law, Edward Cherney, Franco Recchia, Stephen J Kim

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of vitreoretinal diseases. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 44% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. The effect of inner limiting membrane peeling on visual fields: Unravelling a source of bias in glaucoma management.Saudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological Society
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Shriji N PatelDepartment of Ophthalmology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA.
Janice LawDepartment of Ophthalmology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA.
Edward CherneyDepartment of Ophthalmology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA.
Franco RecchiaTennessee Retina, Nashville, TN, USA.
Stephen J KimDepartment of Ophthalmology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA.
Vanderbilt University · USTennessee Retina · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: This work investigates the visual and anatomical outcomes of full-thickness macular hole (FTMH) repair surgery using air in comparison to gas tamponade. Methods: A retrospective consecutive review of medical records was undertaken of all patients undergoing pars plana vitrectomy for idiopathic FTMH at an academic practice from January 2010 to May 2017. Each operative report was reviewed to investigate the agent used for tamponade at the end of the surgery. Preoperative hole duration and size as measured using optical coherence tomography as well as successful postoperative hole closure were recorded. Use of gas or air was not randomized and was instilled at surgeon discretion. Results: The final analysis included 211 eyes. Gas was used as the tamponade agent in 171 of the 211 eyes; most of these eyes (144 of 171) received sulfur hexafluoride (SF Conclusions: Air served as an equally efficacious internal tamponade agent in comparison to nonexpansile gas following idiopathic FTMH repair surgery.

Indexed as

airmacular holepars plana vitrectomyperfluoropropane (C3F8)sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)

Identifiers

PMID37008289
PMCPMC9979030
OpenAlexW3013788236

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.