ArticleJournal of ophthalmology2023
Assessment of Silicone Oil Emulsification: A Comparison of Currently Applied Methods.
Article in Journal of ophthalmology, 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.
- Risk factors for early emulsification of silicone oil after surgery for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2026Observational
- Anterior segment optical coherence tomography for the detection of silicone oil emulsification on the iris surface.Eye (London, England) · 2024Article
- Silicone oil emulsification: A literature review and role of widefield imaging and ultra-widefield imaging with navigated central and peripheral optical coherence tomography technology.Saudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare ultrasound biomicroscopy (UBM), Coulter counter, and B-scan ultrasonography in the evaluation of silicone oil (SO) emulsification. Methods: Patients who underwent primary pars plana vitrectomy with SO tamponade for rhegmatogenous retinal detachment and SO removal were included. UBM images were acquired before the SO removal, and B-scan images were taken after removal. The number of droplets in the first and last 2 mL of washout fluid was analyzed using a Coulter counter. The correlations between these measurements were analyzed. Results: Thirty-four eyes received both UBM and Coulter counter analysis for the first 2 mL of washout fluid, and 34 underwent B-scan and Coulter counter analysis of the last 2 mL washout fluid. The mean UBM grading was 26.41 ± 9.71 (range: 1-36); the mean SO index obtained with B-scan was 5.25 ± 5.00% (range: 0.10-16.49%), and the mean number of SO droplets was 1.26 ± 2.45 × 10 Conclusions: UBM, Coulter counter, and B-scan ultrasonography could all be used in the evaluation of SO emulsification, and their findings were comparable.
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.