ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2025
Accuracy of Intraoperative Aberrometry-Based Prediction of Postoperative Refraction and Astigmatism After Novel Toric Intraocular Lens Implantation.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparison of Prediction Accuracy of Six Toric IOL Power Calculation Formulas, Including Four Available on the ESCRS Online Calculator.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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study prospectively assessed the refractive and astigmatism prediction accuracy of intraoperative aberrometry, Optiwave Refractive Analysis (ORA), in eyes implanted with Clareon toric intraocular lenses (IOLs). Patients and Methods: Patients with age-related cataracts who underwent phacoemulsification and toric IOL implantation using ORA were prospectively included in this single-center study. The absolute refractive prediction error (RPE) and rate of RPE for ORA, Sanders-Retzlaff-Kraft/Theoretical (SRK/T), and Barrett Universal II were evaluated 3 months after surgery. Uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), residual astigmatism, refractive astigmatism prediction error, and the difference between the preoperatively planned axis and actual inserted axis recommended by ORA were assessed. Results: Eighty eyes (80 patients, mean age: 75.0 ± 8.8 years) were included in this study. Mean ± standard deviation (SD) of preoperative corneal astigmatism was 1.91 ± 1.03 D. The median absolute RPE values for ORA, SRK/T, and Barrett Universal II were 0.17, 0.14, and 0.14 D, respectively. At the 3-month follow-up after surgery, the mean ± SD of UCVA and residual astigmatism were 0.06 ± 0.16 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution and 0.43 ± 0.48 D, respectively. The refractive astigmatism prediction errors were 0.11 D in the centroid for both ORA and the Barrett toric formula, at 67° and 63°, respectively. The mean absolute values were 0.38 D for ORA and 0.41 D for the Barrett toric formula. The median absolute value of the axis difference between the planned and actual inserted axes based on ORA was 4.00°. Conclusion: The accuracy of ORA in the prediction of spherical refraction and astigmatism was comparable to that of the preoperative IOL calculation formula in eyes with Clareon toric IOLs. ORA is a useful tool for determining IOL power and improving preoperative corneal astigmatism.
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.