Trial reportBMC ophthalmology2024
Effect of capsular tension ring implantation on intraocular lens calculation formula selection for long axial myopia.
Trial report in BMC ophthalmology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accuracy of Contemporary Intraocular Lens Calculation Formulas Based on Swept-Source OCT Biometry in Eyes with Capsular Tension Ring.Turkish journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Positioning of intraocular lens - capsular tension ring - capsular bag complex in eyes with compromised zonules: An endoscopic observation.American journal of ophthalmology case reports · 2026Article
- Effect of Capsular Tension Ring on Refractive and Morphological Outcomes in Pseudoexfoliative Eyes.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe study investigated the effect of capsular tension ring (CTR) implantation on postoperative refractive stability and accuracy of intraocular lens (IOL) formulas for axial length (AL) ≥ 27.0 mm patients.
methodsProspective case series. The eyes of patients underwent phacoemulsification extraction combined with IOL implantation were classified as CTR implantation (A-CTR) and without CTR implantation (B-CON) groups. Refractive outcome and anterior chamber depth (ACD) were recorded at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months post-operation. Prediction refractive error (PE) and absolute refractive error (AE) of each formula were calculated.
resultsA total of 89 eyes (63 patients) were included and randomized into the CTR (A-CTR) and control groups (B-CON). Comparison of refraction at different postoperative times of the CTR group showed no statistical difference (all P > 0.05). The ACD in the A-CTR group gradually deepened, and that in the B-CON group gradually shallowed (all P > 0.05). The formulas' AE showed statistically significant differences in CTR and CON groups (P < 0.001). The PE of Hill-RBF 2.0 and EVO formulas in the A-CTR group were more hyperopic than that in the B-CON group (all P > 0.05), the other five formulas were more myopic in A-CTR group than that in the B-CON group (all P > 0.05).
conclusionPatients with 13 mm diameter CTR implantation tended to have stable refraction at 1 week post-surgery and 1 month for those without it. CTR of the 13 mm diameter had no effect on the selection of formulas. Additionally, it is found that Kane and EVO formulas were more accurate for patients with AL ≥ 27.0 mm.
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.