ArticleBMC ophthalmology2025
Quantitative analysis of iris-ciliary angle area to optimize ICL selection: a retrospective study.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 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.
- Retrospective Validation of an AI Based Tool for Vault Prediction After Implantable Collamer Lens Surgery for High Myopia.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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo introduce the iris-ciliary angle area (ICAA) as a novel quantitative parameter for enhancing accuracy in implantable Collamer lens (ICL) sizing and postoperative vault prediction, addressing limitations of traditional methods based on white-to-white (WTW) and anterior chamber depth (ACD), particularly in high myopia cases.
methodsIn this retrospective study of 319 eyes, sulcus-to-sulcus (STS), ICAA, and other ocular parameters were analyzed using multivariate linear regression models to assess their influence on ICL diameter and vault. Clinical validation was conducted to compare the predictive accuracy of the proposed model with conventional sizing methods.
resultsSTS was identified as an independent predictor of ICL size, while ICAA, STS, axial length (AL), and ICL size were significant predictors of postoperative vault. The proposed model demonstrated significantly reduced vault prediction errors (75.06 ± 66.43 μm) compared to the NK formula (210 ± 155 μm), NK2 formula (201 ± 146 μm), and Staar nomogram (189 ± 132 μm) (P < 0.001), despite moderate R² values, indicating improved clinical precision in ICL optimization.
conclusionICAA and STS offer valuable additions to ICL selection criteria, significantly improving vault prediction accuracy compared to established formulas, with approximately 60–64% reduction in mean absolute error. The quantitative assessment of posterior chamber structures through these parameters enhances procedural reliability and surgical outcomes. Further validation is recommended for cases involving extreme vaults or rotated ICL implants to confirm the model’s broad applicability.
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.