ArticleScientific reports2024
Comparison of ocular biometric measurements and intraocular lens power calculation using different methods in eyes with implantable collamer lenses.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Factors affecting the refractive error after cataract surgery.International ophthalmology · 2025Review
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 prospective cohort study included 80 healthy candidates for Implantable Collamer Lens (ICL) implantation who underwent biometric assessments with Scheimpflug imaging (the Pentacam-AXL) and swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT; the IOLMaster-700), both before and 3 months after surgery. The main outcome measures were mean keratometry, anterior chamber depth, axial length, and various intraocular lens (IOL) calculation formulas (Haigis, SRK/T, Hoffer Q, Holladay 1, Barrett Universal 2, and Olsen). The interchangeability of the devices was assessed by generating 95% limits of agreement (95% LoA) and associated Bland-Altman plots. The average age of the participants was 31.5 ± 5.4 years (22-43), with 58 (72.5%) being female. Among the cases analyzed, 11 (13.4%) had incorrect anterior lens surface segmentation using the IOLMaster-700, and 1 case (1.2%) had inappropriate segmentation using the Pentacam-AXL. Postoperative IOL power calculation resulted in readings that were, on average, 0.15 to 0.30 D higher compared to preoperative measurements. The 95% LoAs could differ by up to 0.85 D higher after surgery, indicating weak agreement between pre- and postoperative measurements. There was poor agreement between the IOLMaster-700 and Pentacam-AXL in IOL power calculation for eyes with post-ICL implantation, with a difference of more than 1 D in the 95% LoAs. In conclusion, Scheimpflug imaging was found to be less susceptible than the SS-OCT technique to segmentation errors of the anterior lens surface after ICL implantation. Neither device showed interchangeable results for pre- versus postoperative IOL power calculation. The determination of IOL power by the IOLMaster-700 versus Pentacam-AXL was not interchangeable in eyes with ICL implantation.
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.