Trial reportBMC ophthalmology2025
Effect of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery for cataracts after pars plana vitrectomy: a prospective randomized controlled study.
Trial report in BMC 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.
- Outcomes and Safety of Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Phacovitrectomy Using 25-Gauge Pars Plana Vitrectomy.Beyoglu eye journal · 2026Article
- Surgical method selection for cataracts after pars plana vitrectomy in high myopia: comparison between femtosecond laser-assisted and conventional phacoemulsification.BMC ophthalmology · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the efficacy of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) and conventional phacoemulsification surgery (CPS) in treating postvitrectomy cataracts.
methodsProspective randomized controlled study. Patients who underwent cataract surgery after pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) were randomly divided into the FLACS group and the CPS group. Preoperative data of all patients were collected to compare intraoperative complications, average phacoemulsification energy (AVE), effective phacoemulsification time (EPT), postoperative intraocular pressure, corneal endothelial cell density (ECD), and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA).
resultsA total of 92 eyes were included in the analysis, with 47 eyes in the FLACS group and 45 eyes in the CPS group. The intraoperative AVEs and EPTs in the FLACS group were both lower than those in the CPS group (P < 0.05). In the FLACS group, incomplete prechopping and incomplete capsulorhexis occurred in 3 eyes (3/47, 6.38%), and incomplete lens dislocation occurred in 1 eye (1/47, 2.13%). In the CPS group, incomplete lens dislocation occurred in 2 eyes (2/45, 4.44%), and anterior capsule tears occurred in 1 eye (1/45, 2.22%). There was no statistically significant difference in intraoperative complications between the two groups (P > 0.05). Postoperatively, intraocular pressure (IOP) was lower in both groups than preoperatively, and there was no statistically significant difference in intraocular pressure between the two groups at three months postsurgery (P > 0.05). Three months postoperatively, the ECD in the FLACS group was greater than that in the CPS group, with less average endothelial cell loss (ECL) than that in the CPS group (P < 0.01). The BCVA in both groups improved to varying degrees compared with the preoperative values, with the FLACS group performing better than the CPS group on the first postoperative day (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups at one week, one month, or three months postoperatively (all P > 0.05).
conclusionFLACS is safe and effective for treating post-PPV cataracts and, compared with CPS, facilitates early postoperative recovery with no difference in final visual acuity. Residual silicone oil in the anterior chamber post-PPV may lead to certain specific outcomes for FLACS. Although it may not affect surgical results, it is still noteworthy.
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.