ArticleScientific reports2024
Repositioned versus exchanged flanged intraocular lens fixation for intraocular lens dislocation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Modified Scleral Fixation for Intraocular Lenses With Unloopable Haptic Designs.Journal of vitreoretinal diseases · 2026Article
- Article
- Comparative Functional and Morphological Data of Different IOL Dislocation Treatment Methods.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Late Reposition of a Dislocated Toric Intraocular Lens in a Fibrosed Capsular Bag: A Case Report.Case reports in ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to compare the outcomes of flanged intraocular lens (IOL) fixation with new IOL exchange after dislocated IOL removal and repositioned dislocated IOL in patients with IOL dislocation. Eighty-nine eyes that underwent flanged IOL fixation were retrospectively included, with 51 eyes in the exchanged IOL group and 38 eyes in the repositioned IOL group. In both groups, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) improved at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively and did not differ between the two groups at any of these time points. However, at 1 week postoperatively, BCVA in the repositioned IOL group improved compared with baseline, whereas that in the exchanged IOL group did not. Moreover, there were lesser changes in the corneal endothelial cell density (ECD) and corneal astigmatism in the repositioned IOL group than in the exchanged IOL group. The IOL positions, including IOL tilt and IOL decentration, were not different between the groups. Flanged IOL fixation with new IOL exchange and with repositioned dislocated IOL for patients with IOL dislocation had similar visual outcomes and IOL position. However, the latter had a smaller corneal ECD decrease and astigmatic change. This technique was effective in treating IOL dislocation while minimizing corneal injury.
Indexed as
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.