ArticleBMC ophthalmology2024
Assessment of intraocular lens tilt and decentration after femtosecond laser-assisted and conventional cataract surgery at 12 months and beyond.
Article 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.
- Intraocular Lens Positional Instability and Refractive Prediction Error after Cataract Surgery in Eyes with Retinitis Pigmentosa: A Comparative Study.Korean journal of ophthalmology : KJO · 2026Article
- Yamane Technique Versus Prolene Mesh for Intraocular Lens Scleral Fixation in Aphakia.Journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- IOL tilt and decentration: a comparison of different haptic designs using CNN and SS-OCT in a short term.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo compare long-term intraocular lens (IOL) decentration and tilt following femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) and conventional surgery using swept-source anterior segment ocular coherence tomography (SS-ASOCT).
methodsIn this retrospective cross-sectional study, all patients underwent FLACS or conventional cataract surgery. Those with a minimum of 12-months follow-up since surgery were included. Patients with surgical complications were excluded. Demographics, preoperative ocular measurements (axial length, anterior chamber depth), and postoperative measurements [corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), autorefraction, keratometry, IOL type] were collected. Postoperative IOL tilt and decentration were compared using SS-ASOCT between patients with FLACS and conventional cataract surgery. Subgroup analysis was conducted to analyze tilt and decentration by haptic type (single-piece vs. three-piece).
resultsA total of 188 eyes were included [110 (58.5%) in the FLACS group and 78 (41.5%) in the conventional group]. No differences were observed between the FLACS and conventional groups regarding preoperative parameters. FLACS resulted in less IOL decentration compared to conventional cataract surgery (170 μm vs. 240 μm, p = 0.002). No statistically significant differences were observed between the FLACS and conventional groups in the magnitude and axis of IOL tilt. Both groups had a trend of IOL tilt toward the inferotemporal aspects. Moreover, no difference regarding postoperative CDVA, spherical equivalent, and keratometric astigmatism was observed.
conclusionsFLACS resulted in significantly better long-term IOL centration than conventional surgery with manual capsulotomy. No significant difference in IOL tilt or postoperative CDVA was observed between FLACS and conventional cataract surgery.
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.