ArticleCureus2025
Performance of Trifocal Intraocular Lens Implantation in Highly Myopic Patients With and Without Astigmatism.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo analyze the performance of trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) implantation in patients with high myopia vs patients with low-to-moderate myopia, with or without astigmatism.
methodsA retrospective study examining trifocal IOL implantation in myopic patients was conducted at a single institution by one surgeon. Patients were followed on postoperative day 1, at one month, and at three months. Refraction was performed between the first and third months. A previously validated 10-question survey, scored from 0-10, was conducted one month after surgery. Patients were grouped into high myopia (≤ -5.00 diopters (D), axial length >25 mm) and low-to-moderate myopia (-1.00 to -5.00 D, axial length <25 mm). Exclusion criteria included high spherical aberration above 0.6, macular pathology, glaucoma, corneal disease, or scarring. Refractive outcomes, uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA), and patient satisfaction surveys were compared.
resultsA total of 72 eyes were included in the study (26 high myopes and 46 low-to-moderate myopes). The axial length and sphere were 26.67 ± 1.44 mm and -7.29 ± 2.80 D in the high myopia group vs 24.10 ± 1.11 mm and -2.38 ± 1.86 D in the low-to-moderate myopia group, p<0.001 and p<0.001, respectively. At one month postoperatively, UDVA, UNVA, and spherical equivalent (SE) revealed no difference between myopic groups. Residual refractive errors were ≤0.5 D in >90% of high (n=46) and low-to-moderate myopes (n=26). Comparing patients with >1.0 D of astigmatism in both high myopic (n=14) and low-to-moderate myopic groups (n=24) revealed no significant difference in sphere, cylinder, SE, monocular and binocular UDVA or UNVA, p>0.05. Overall patient satisfaction and the presence and severity of dysphotopsias were also similar between all groups, p>0.05.
conclusionTrifocal IOL may demonstrate high levels of visual performance and patient satisfaction in the presence of high axial myopia vs low-to-moderate myopia in patients with greater or less than 1.0 D of astigmatism in specific patients.
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.