ArticleJournal of cataract and refractive surgery2025
Refractive, visual, and safety outcomes of three surgical techniques for aphakia correction.
Article in Journal of cataract and refractive surgery, 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.
- Miri 4-points marker: a low-cost marking device for flanged intrascleral intraocular lens fixation with modified Yamane technique.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Macular and Functional Outcomes After Secondary IOL Implantation Using the Yamane Technique in Aphakia, IOL Subluxation, and IOL Dislocation.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare refractive, visual, and safety outcomes of 3 methods for surgical correction of aphakia: anterior chamber intraocular lens (AC IOL), intrascleral haptic fixation intraocular lens (ISHF-IOL), and Gore-Tex suture fixation of modified eyelet toric intraocular lens (GSF-MET IOL).
settingTertiary care academic center.
designMultisurgeon retrospective case series.
methodsReview of 357 eyes undergoing one of the above 3 techniques between 2017 and 2024. Comparative refractive (defocus [spherical equivalent (SE)], astigmatism [refractive cylinder (RefCyl)], and blur [defocus equivalent]), visual acuity (corrected distance visual acuity [CDVA]), and safety outcomes (cystoid macular edema and return to the operating room [ROR] events) were recorded. Owing to concerns about IOL tilting with one of the models, a subgroup analysis was performed on 2 IOL models within the ISHF group. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, 1-way analysis of variance, and 2-sample t testing.
resultsAll 3 groups had similar SE ( P = .87), RefCyl ( P = .91), and CDVA in eyes without significant comorbidities ( P = .23). ROR was similar among all groups ( P = .08). Within the ISHF-IOL group, CT Lucia 602 and Sensar AR40 had similar SE and RefCyl ( P = .18 and P = .15, respectively). CDVA was similar in eyes without significant comorbidities for both IOL models ( P = .70). ROR was significantly higher with CT Lucia 602 than with Sensar AR40 ( P = .03).
conclusionsAll 3 surgical techniques can provide good refractive, visual acuity, and safety outcomes. Within the ISHF-IOL group, the Sensar AR40 had lower ROR rates than the CT Lucia 602, with similar CDVA outcomes.
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.