ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2024
Intraocular pressure before and after capsulorhexis using two viscoelastic substances and two surgical approaches in enucleated porcine eyes.
Article in International journal of ophthalmology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intracameral pressure during capsulorhexis in cataract surgery using cohesive versus dispersive ophthalmic viscosurgical devices: a randomised trial.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2026Trial
- Agreement and repeatability of a novel portable transpalpebral tonometer for home tonometry versus non-contact and rebound tonometry.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo investigate the influence of ophthalmic viscoelastic devices (OVDs) and different surgical approaches on the intraocular pressure (IOP) before and after creation of the curvilinear circular capsulorhexis (CCC) as a measure for anterior chamber stability during this maneuver.
methodsProspective experimental WetLab study carried out on enucleated porcine eyes. IOP was measured before and after CCC with the iCare Rebound tonometer (iCare ic200; iCare Finland Oy, Vantaa, Finland). The OVDs used were a cohesive one [Z-Hyalin, Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Germany; hyaluronic acid (HA)] and a dispersive [Z-Celcoat, Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Germany; hydroxy propylmethylcellulosis (HPMC)]. The CCC was created using Utrata forceps or 23 g microforceps in different combinations with the OVDs.
resultsUsing the Utrata forceps the IOP dropped from 63.65±6.44 to 11.25±3.63 mm Hg during the CCC. The use of different OVDs made no difference. Using the 23 g microforceps the IOP dropped from 65.35±8.15 to 36.55±6.09 mm Hg. The difference between IOP drop using either Utrata forceps or 23 g microforceps was highly significant regardless of the OVD used.
conclusionUsing the sideport for the creation of the capsulorhexis leads to a lesser drop in IOP during this maneuver compared to the main incision in enucleated porcine eyes. The use of different OVD has no significant influence on IOP drop.
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.