ArticleScientific reports2024
Characteristics and factors associated with diameter deviation of rhexis reference circle generated by an image-guided system in cataract surgery: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
More attention should be paid to the deviations between the actual diameter of the rhexis reference circle which projected by the Image-guided systems and its intended size, and assess the influence of ocular biometric parameters on the deviation. In this study, the Callisto eye image-guided system was employed to generate a digital rhexis reference circle (rhexis overlay) set at an intended diameter of 6 mm and a screenshot of the video was taken at the end of the cataract surgery, then to compare the deviation between the observed rhexis overlay diameter (ROD) and the optic diameter (6 mm). The factors influencing diameter deviation were identified with univariate and multivariate linear regression. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on factors identified in the multivariate regression. And we observed that a total of 213 eyes of 174 patients were included in the final analysis. The diameter deviation averaged - 0.24 ± 0.28 mm (P = 0.0001) and was positively correlated with phakic anterior chamber depth (ACD) (P < 0.001) and negatively correlated with white-to-white (WTW) measurement (P < 0.001). Subgroup analyses revealed significantly greater diameter deviation in cases with preoperative ACD < 2.5 mm and WTW ≥ 12.0 mm (all P < 0.05). Following optimization, the mean diameter deviation was 0.00047 ± 0.26 mm (P > 0.05). In conclusion, the Callisto eye image-guided system demonstrates good precision in CCC assistance. However, there remains a slight deviation from the intended size when generating the rhexis reference circle in eyes with shallow anterior chambers and larger corneas. Implementing an optimization process could be beneficial for these eyes.
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.