ArticleScientific reports2024
Efficacy of enhanced monofocal intraocular lens in combined phacovitrectomy for patients with photoreceptor-preserving epiretinal membrane.
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 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.
- Contrast Sensitivity After Combined MIGS and Cataract Surgery: A Comparison of Monofocal and Enhanced Monofocal Intraocular Lenses.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Clinical Outcomes of an Enhanced and Conventional Monofocal IOL in Patients with Early and Intermediate Dry Age-Related Macular Degeneration.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Enhanced Monofocal IOLs Improve Patient Satisfaction in Phaco-Vitrectomy for ERM.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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of this study is to evaluate the visual outcomes and quality of an enhanced monofocal intraocular lens (IOL), compared to a conventional monofocal IOL in patients with epiretinal membrane (ERM). This retrospective comparative study reviewed medical records of 110 eyes of 110 patients with photoreceptor-preserving ERM (55 patients in each group) who underwent phacovitrectomy and received either a conventional monofocal IOL (Tecnis PCB00) or an enhanced monofocal IOL (Tecnis Eyhance ICB00) from March 2021 to October 2021. Baseline examination included corrected (CDVA) and uncorrected (UDVA) distance visual acuity, and measurement of pupil size. Postoperative evaluation included uncorrected intermediate (UIVA) and near (UNVA) visual acuity, and defocus curve. Contrast sensitivity was assessed using CGT-2000 (Takagi, Seiko, Japan). The baseline parameters showed no difference between PCB00 and ICB00 groups. At 3 months, there was no difference of UDVA and CDVA, but UIVA (0.27 vs. 0.39 LogMAR; p = 0.001) and UNVA (0.35 vs. 0.45 LogMAR; p = 0.014) were better in ICB00 group. On the defocus curve, the ICB00 group demonstrated a slower slope decrease, with higher visual acuity from - 1.5 to -3.0 diopters when compared to the PCB00 group. The distant contrast sensitivity showed no significant difference between two groups. In conclusion, the enhanced monofocal IOL improved intermediate visual outcomes, achieving equivalent distance visual acuity and similar contrast sensitivity to the conventional monofocal IOL. It could be an alternative option to conventional monofocal IOL when planning combined phacovitrectomy for patients with photoreceptor-preserving ERM.
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.