ArticleRomanian journal of ophthalmology
Risk of complications in patients with one eye during and after ocular surgery.
Article in Romanian journal of ophthalmology. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study examined patients with permanent legal blindness in one eye after a previous eye surgery and those with permanent legal blindness in one eye for non-surgical reasons. The objective of this study was to assess the occurrence of complications both during and after surgery in patients undergoing phacoemulsification for cataracts or vitreoretinal surgery for retinal detachment in the fellow eye. Methods: A retrospective study included 62 patients (group 1) with legal blindness in one eye, compared to 62 control patients (group 2) undergoing similar surgeries. Complications, history of complex surgery leading to legal blindness, and demographic characteristics were analyzed. Results: In group 1, the complication rate was significantly higher in patients who underwent both phacoemulsification and vitreoretinal surgeries than in group 2 (p < 0.05). In group 1, complications developed during surgery in the other eye in 28.1% of the patients whose permanent legal blindness stemmed from a complication in the previous surgery. In contrast, complications arose in the surgery of the other eye in 10% of patients whose permanent legal blindness did not result from any complications in the previous surgery. A statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups (P < 0.05). Discussion: In our study, if the cause of eye loss in patients with permanent legal blindness in one eye was a surgical complication, the possibility of complications during surgery in the other eye was high. Surgery can be planned at higher visual acuity levels in a patient who has lost one eye for reasons other than surgery. In patients who have lost one eye due to previous surgery, surgery for the other can be planned at lower visual acuity levels. Conclusion: This is the first report to compare the rate of complications during and after surgery in patients with pre-existing permanent legal blindness in one eye who underwent cataract surgery and vitreoretinal surgery in the other.
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.