Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37493673›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open ophthalmology2023

Comparing microscope light-associated glare and comfort between heads-up 3D digital and conventional microscopes in cataract surgery: a randomised, multicentre, single-blind, controlled trial.

Vincent Gualino, Kevin Pierne, Anthony Manassero, Sébastien Bruneau, Aude Couturier, Ramin Tadayoni

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open ophthalmology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05085314 (Prospective Multicenter Randomized Controlled 1), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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.

NCT05085314 nacompletednot on this map

Prospective Multicenter Randomized Controlled 1:1 Study Evaluating the Efficacy of a 3D Digital Operating Microscope Compared to Conventional Microscopes Microscopes on the Comfort and Subjective Visual Sensations of the Patients Related to the Microscope Light During Initial Cataract Surgery Under Topical Anesthesia Topical Anesthesia

TypeinterventionalSponsorFondation Ophtalmologique Adolphe de RothschildRan2021 to 2022Enrolled134ConditionsCataractArmsNgenuity digital 3D microscope, Conventional microscope
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Vincent GualinoDepartment of Ophthalmology, Clinique Honoré Cave, Montauban, France v.gual@hotmail.fr.ORCID 0000-0002-3941-1304
Kevin PierneDepartment of Ophthalmology, Clinique Honoré Cave, Montauban, France.
Anthony ManasseroDepartment of Ophthalmology, Hôpital Fondation Adolphe De Rothschild, Paris, France.
Sébastien BruneauDepartment of Ophthalmology, Hôpital Fondation Adolphe De Rothschild, Paris, France.
Aude CouturierDepartment of Ophthalmology, Université Paris Cité, AP-HP, Hôpital Lariboisière, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0001-8549-7455
Ramin TadayoniDepartment of Ophthalmology, Hôpital Fondation Adolphe De Rothschild, Paris, France.
Fondation Ophtalmologique Adolphe de Rothschild · FRUniversité Paris Cité · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare subjective levels of comfort and visual experiences related to microscope light in patients undergoing their first cataract surgery with topical anaesthesia using a digital microscope (the NGENUITY three-dimensional (3D) visualisation system) or a conventional microscope. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A prospective, randomised, single-blinded, parallel-group, multicentre, interventional study. Patients (n=128) were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups: the experimental group (n=63) had surgery using the digital microscope and the control group (n=65) had surgery with a conventional microscope. The primary outcome was patients' subjective experience of glare from the microscope light during surgery on a numerical scale from 0 to 10. Key secondary outcomes were patients' subjective levels of comfort and visual experiences related to the microscope light.

resultsThe experimental group reported significantly lower levels of glare; median levels were 1.0 (0.0-4.0) for the experimental group vs 3.0 (0.0-6.0) for the control group (p=0.027). They also reported higher levels of comfort; median ratings were 8.0 (6.5-10.0) in the experimental group and 7.0 (5.0-9.0) in controls (p=0.026). There were no group differences in ratings of subjective pain or visual disturbances. Median microscope light intensity was lower in the experimental group than controls; 3425.0 (2296.0-4300.0) Lux vs 24 279.0 (16 000.0-26 500.0) Lux (p<0.0001), respectively.

conclusionCompared with conventional microscopes, the NGENUITY 3D visualisation system allows surgeons to operate with lower levels of light exposure, resulting in significantly less glare and improved comfort in patients undergoing cataract surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05085314.

Indexed as

CataractCataract ExtractionGlareHumansProspective StudiesSingle-Blind Methodclinical trialtreatment surgeryvisual perception

Identifiers

PMID37493673
PMCPMC10314628
OpenAlexW4382139218

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.