ArticleRomanian journal of ophthalmology
Visual and Refractive Outcomes of Toric Implantable Phakic Contact Lens in Stable Keratoconus - A retrospective interventional cross-sectional study.
Article in Romanian journal of ophthalmology. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Refractive management in keratoconus is a challenging task. The study aimed to evaluate the results of Toric Implantable Phakic Contact Lenses in providing visual rehabilitation for patients with stable keratoconus after one year of primary procedures, including collagen cross-linking, topo-guided photorefractive keratectomy, and intracorneal ring segments. Methods: This retrospective cross-sectional interventional study was conducted at a tertiary eye care hospital in South India. Sixty-four patients with 86 eyes were included, and all of them received Toric Implantable Phakic Contact Lens (TIPCL) implantation. All patients were subsequently divided into three subgroups: collagen cross-linking (CXL), intracorneal ring segments (INTACS+CXL), and Topographically Guided photorefractive keratectomy (TGPRK+CXL). Patients were followed up regularly for a period of one year. Results: We included data from 64 patients with 86 eyes, with an average age of 30.67 ± 7.96 years. Reduction in the mean spherical equivalent, sphere, and cylinder values was observed across all three subgroups, and the results were statistically significant. There was considerable improvement in uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and best-corrected distance visual acuity (BDVA). At the end of one year, 75.3% of eyes achieved UDVA improvement of more than 3 lines. The average safety index was 0.77, and the efficacy index was 1.20. Discussion: TIPCL implantation proved to be a safe and effective option for correcting residual refractive error in keratoconus patients after stabilization procedures. Our results align with previous reports on phakic IOLs, demonstrating comparable safety and efficacy indices. The study emphasizes the importance of careful patient selection, as outcomes are strongly influenced by baseline refraction, corneal irregularity, and disease stability. While complications such as lens rotation, shallow anterior chamber, and cataract were rare, they emphasize the need for meticulous surgical planning and postoperative monitoring. Compared with existing literature, this is among the first studies to analyze outcomes across three stabilization subgroups, underscoring TIPCL as a viable, reversible option for patients with stable keratoconus. Conclusion: The implantation of Toric Implantable Phakic Contact Lens (TIPCL) is a valuable option for visual rehabilitation in keratoconus 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.