ArticleScientific reports2025
Surgically induced astigmatism and refractive outcomes after minimally invasive glaucoma surgery combined with cataract surgery.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Should Schlemm Canal-Based MIGS Be Combined with Cataract Surgery in Patients Receiving Topical Glaucoma Therapy? A Cataract Surgeon-Oriented Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Comparison of the effectiveness between propensity score-matched trabecular micro-bypass stent versus ab interno trabeculotomy.Japanese journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Impact of Intraocular Lens Design on Refractive Endpoint Selection: A Call for a New Paradigm.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Review
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
Minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) is believed to induce less surgically induced astigmatism (SIA) due to smaller incisions, yet few studies have evaluated SIA in MIGS patients. This retrospective cohort study compared SIA and refractive outcomes among three MIGS techniques: first-generation trabecular micro-bypass stent (iStent [IS], n = 36), second-generation iStent inject W (IW, n = 39), and microhook ab interno trabeculotomy (μLOT, n = 36). SIA, refractive prediction error (RPE), intraocular pressure (IOP), and glaucoma subtype were analyzed. SIA remained minimal, with no significant differences between groups (p = 0.95, linear mixed model). RPE significantly differed between IW and μLOT (p = 0.025) but remained mild in both. The μLOT group exhibited a slight myopic shift and greater IOP reduction. However, absolute prediction error did not significantly differ among groups (p = 0.062). Subgroup analysis confirmed the refractive neutrality of MIGS across primary open-angle glaucoma, pseudoexfoliative glaucoma, and chronic angle-closure glaucoma. These findings support the refractive stability of MIGS when combined with cataract surgery, suggesting IS, IW, and μLOT as equally viable options from a refractive standpoint.
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.