ArticleJapanese journal of ophthalmology2025
Comparative analysis of axial length measurement method for eyes with submacular hemorrhage.
Article in Japanese journal of ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A-eye: Automated 3D MRI segmentation and morphometric feature extraction for eye and orbit atlas construction.PloS one · 2026Article
- Automatic segmentation of calibration device boundaries on ophthalmic optical biometry instruments in optical coherence tomography images.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo identify a method for comparing preoperative axial length (AL) measurements with postoperative AL in submacular hemorrhage (SMH). STUDY
designRetrospective.
methodsThis study included 30 patients who underwent vitrectomy for SMH (January 2016-January 2023) with preoperative and postoperative AL data. Preoperative AL was obtained using ultrasonography for the affected eye (aUS-AL) and compared to those measured using optical biometry (OB) for the affected and fellow eyes (aOB-AL and fOB-AL, respectively). Postoperative AL (aPost-AL) was defined as the AL of the affected eye by OB. The absolute differences between the preoperative AL (aUS-AL, aOB-AL, and fOB-AL) and aPost-AL were assessed.
resultsaUS-AL, aOB-AL, and fOB-AL values were 23.50 ± 1.41 mm, 23.32 ± 1.40 mm, and 23.66 ± 1.45 mm, respectively, correlating strongly with aPost-AL (23.54 ± 1.37 mm) (all R > 0.95). fOB-AL exceeded aPost-AL significantly (P = 0.02). In all 30 eyes, absolute differences between preoperative AL and aPost-AL were 0.19 ± 0.18 mm, 0.28 ± 0.32 mm, and 0.21 ± 0.22 mm, respectively, which were not significantly different from each other (all P > 0.05). In nine eyes with SMH height > 1000 μm or unmeasurable, the absolute difference between aOB-AL and aPost-AL (0.42 ± 0.33 mm) exceeded that of aUS-AL and aPost-AL (0.10 ± 0.09 mm) (P = 0.003).
conclusionAlthough aUS-AL, aOB-AL, and fOB-AL correlated well with postoperative AL in patients with SMH, fOB-AL may be measured longer and aOB-AL shorter in some cases. Therefore, aUS-AL may be considered primarily in determining IOL power of cataract surgery performed in combination with SMH displacement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39832021What 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.