Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37171601›Full record

Trial reportGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2023

Influence of isofocal intraocular lenses on objective refraction based on autorefraction and aberrometry.

Lidia Pérez-Sanz, Carla Charbel, Francisco Poyales, Nuria Garzón

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The BVI ISOPUREFrontiers in ophthalmology · 2023
    Review
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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Lidia Pérez-SanzMiranza IOA, C/Galileo 104, 28003, Madrid, Spain. lidia.perez@miranza.es.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9164-9627
Carla CharbelOptometry and Vision Department, Faculty of Optics and Optometry, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Francisco PoyalesMiranza IOA, C/Galileo 104, 28003, Madrid, Spain.
Nuria GarzónOptometry and Vision Department, Faculty of Optics and Optometry, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Universidad Complutense de Madrid · ESOspedale di Mirano · ITTelescopio Nazionale Galileo · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate and compare the objective refractions obtained by autorefraction and aberrometry under different lighting conditions with an isofocal intraocular lens (Isopure, BVI medical, Liége, Belgium) compared to a monofocal control lens (Micropure, BVI medical, Liége, Belgium) with the same platform and material.

methodsProspective, comparative and randomized study on patients undergoing cataract surgery and bilateral isofocal or monofocal IOL implantation. A total of 44 subjects were randomly assigned to either the isofocal group (n = 22) or the Micropure (n = 22). Manifest refraction (MR) was always performed under the same lighting conditions for all the patients. For objective refraction the autorefractor KR8800 and the aberrometer OPD-Scan III (Nidek Inc., Tokyo, Japan.) were used. For each eye included in the study, six result sets were collected: MR, AR (autorefraction measured with the autorefractor), WF-P and WF-M (Zernike-coefficients-based objective refraction, photopic and mesopic pupil size), OPD-C and OPD-M (autorefraction measured with the aberrometer in photopic and mesopic conditions).

resultsThe mean sphere for MR was 0.03 ± 0.32D for the Isopure group and 0.24 ± 0.22D for the monofocal group (p = 0.013). For the Isopure group, Friedman analysis showed statistically significant differences for sphere measured with WF-P (p = 0.035), WF-M (p = 0.018) and OPD-M (p = 0.000), and SE measured with OPD-M (p = 0.004). In the Micropure lens group, the Friedman analysis showed differences for all values studied (p < 0.05). Correlation coefficients showed that AR is the objective method with the strongest correlation values for all components of refraction for both groups.

conclusionThe modification of the surfaces of the isofocal lens does not have a negative impact on the refraction obtained by AR compared to a standard monofocal intraocular lens.

Indexed as

Lenses, IntraocularPhacoemulsificationAberrometryHumansLens Implantation, IntraocularProspective StudiesRefraction, OcularVisual AcuityAberrometryAutorefractionIntraocular lensIsofocalObjective refractionSubjective refraction

Identifiers

PMID37171601
OpenAlexW4376225573

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.