ArticleScientific reports2024
Comparison of outcomes between modified double-flanged sutureless scleral fixation and conventional sutured scleral fixation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07252349 (Influence of Different Needle Insertion Positions on the Clinical Efficacy of Suture-Fixated Transscleral IOL Implantation Without Knots), which is not on this map. 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.
Influence of Different Needle Insertion Positions on the Clinical Efficacy of Suture-Fixated Transscleral IOL Implantation Without Knots: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Visual outcomes and short-term complication profile following Yamane scleral fixation of intraocular lenses across different surgical indications.International ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Cystoid macular oedema after flanged intraocular lens scleral fixation using the Yamane technique: a multicentre cohort study.Scientific reports · 2025Observational
- Recent advances and current challenges in suture and sutureless scleral fixation techniques for intraocular lens: a comprehensive review.Eye and vision (London, England) · 2024Review
- Scleral suture fixation of a foldable intraocular lens without a scleral flap or groove.Romanian journal of ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This retrospective study aimed to compare the outcomes of modified double-flanged sutureless scleral fixation versus sutured scleral fixation. Medical records of 65 eyes from 65 patients who underwent double-flanged scleral fixation (flange group) or conventional scleral fixation (suture group) between 2021 and 2022 were reviewed. Visual and refractive outcomes, as well as postoperative complications, were compared 1, 2, and 6 months after surgery. We included 31 eyes in the flange group and 34 eyes in the suture group. At 6 months postoperatively, the flange group showed better uncorrected visual acuity (0.251 ± 0.328 vs. 0.418 ± 0.339 logMAR, P = 0.041) and a smaller myopic shift (- 0.74 ± 0.93 vs. - 1.33 ± 1.15 diopter, P = 0.007) compared to the suture group. The flange group did not experience any instances of iris capture, while the suture group had iris capture in 10 eyes (29.4%; P < 0.001). In the flange group, all intraocular lenses remained centered, whereas in the suture group, they were decentered in 8 eyes (23.5%; P = 0.005). The double-flanged technique not only prevented iris capture and decentration of the intraocular lens but also reduced myopic shift by enhancing the stability of the intraocular lens.
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.