Trial reportJournal of cataract and refractive surgery2026
Eight-year results of LASIK with or without combined accelerated crosslinking in highly myopic eyes.
Trial report in Journal of cataract and refractive surgery, 2026. 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 8-year results of femtosecond laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) combined with simultaneous accelerated corneal crosslinking (LASIK-Xtra) compared with conventional LASIK (convLASIK).
settingDepartment of Ophthalmology, Goethe-University, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
designProspective, randomized fellow eye-controlled clinical trial.
methodsPatients who received randomized treatment with the LASIK-Xtra (30 mW/cm 2 , 90 seconds with continuous UV-A) in 1 eye and convLASIK in the fellow eye were subjected 1 year (pos1y), and 8 years postoperatively (pos8y) to subjective refraction, uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), endothelial cell count (ECC), biomechanical evaluation, and tomographic examination.
results26 eyes (-7.07 ± 1.86 diopter [D]) from 13 patients (mean age 30.7 ± 10.4 years) were included. UDVA and CDVA were insignificantly different at pos1y and pos8y between convLASIK and LASIK-Xtra (each P > .28). The safety index at pos8y was 1.09 for convLASIK and 1.15 for LASIK-Xtra ( P = .799), and the efficacy index 0.91 and 0.94 ( P = .875), respectively. Significant myopic shift in spherical equivalent between pos1y (-0.30 ± 0.40 D) and pos8y (-0.80 ± 0.86 D) was found in the convLASIK group ( P = .018), compared the LASIK-Xtra group (-0.25 ± 0.49 D and -0.40 ± 0.86 D; P = .261), respectively. However, these refractive changes cannot be fully attributed to corneal alterations alone and may also reflect other factors. Insignificant differences in mean keratometry, corneal thickness, and ECC were found at pos8y ( P > .05). The stress-strain index was the only biomechanical parameter that was significantly higher in the LASIK-Xtra group at pos8y ( P = .034).
conclusionsAfter 8 years, no substantial disparities in efficacy and safety indices were observed between the 2 groups. There were no substantial differences in most of the evaluated postoperative corneal biomechanical parameters between the 2 groups. However, these findings need to be validated by further studies with larger sample sizes.
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.