ArticleScientific reports2025
Effect of perfusion pressure sensors on posterior capsule elevation in the porcine eye model with eyelid speculums.
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.
- Anterior chamber stability of a novel phacoemulsification machine through the slit side view method.Journal of cataract and refractive surgery · 2026Article
- Speculum-Induced Intraocular Pressure Elevation During Cataract Surgery and Its Association with Axial Length: A Retrospective Clinical Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Occlusion Break Surge and Anterior Chamber Stability in the Intraocular Environment of Modern Phacoemulsification: A Narrative Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluated the posterior capsule elevation ratio after occlusion break in a porcine eye model with an eyelid speculum (ES) using Centurion Vision System with Active Sentry handpiece (AS). The mean intraocular pressure of the porcine eyes with the ES was significantly higher than that of without the ES (15.42 ± 4.10 mmHg vs. 21.86 ± 4.12 mmHg, P = 0.0003). Changes in the posterior capsule elevation were observed using the slit side view method in the following four groups: with an ES using AS [AS (ES+)], without an ES using AS [AS (ES-)], with an ES using the Ozil handpiece [OZ (ES+)], and without an ES using OZ [OZ (ES-)]. Eleven eyes in each group were tested. AS (ES+) and OZ (ES+) had a significantly higher rate of posterior capsule elevation than did AS (ES-) and OZ (ES-) (P = 0.0135 and P = 0.010). AS (ES+) and AS (ES-) significantly suppressed posterior capsule elevation compared with OZ (ES+) and OZ (ES-) (P = 0.034 and P = 0.045). Porcine eyes with ES had increased IOP and greater posterior capsule elevation after occlusion break than did those without. AS effectively suppressed posterior capsule elevation better than did OZ.
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.