ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparative effectiveness of toric IOLs and LRIs for correction of moderate regular astigmatism during phacoemulsification.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Corneal astigmatism frequently coexists with age-related cataract and may impair uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) if not addressed during surgery. Limbal relaxing incisions (LRI) and toric intraocular lenses (toric IOL) are two common methods for astigmatism correction, but evidence comparing their effectiveness in patients with moderate regular astigmatism remains limited. A prospective study was conducted at Yuyao Maternity and Child Health Care Hospital between January and December 2024. Ninety-three patients aged 55-80 years with moderate regular corneal astigmatism undergoing cataract surgery were allocated to either the LRI group (n = 45) or the toric IOL group (n = 48) based on informed voluntary choice following standardized preoperative counseling. All procedures were performed by a single experienced surgeon. The primary outcome was residual refractive cylinder at 6 months postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included UDVA, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), corneal astigmatism (K2-K1), and subjective visual satisfaction. Both groups showed significant improvement in UDVA and reduction in refractive cylinder postoperatively. At 6 months, the toric IOL group had significantly lower residual cylinder (0.67 ± 0.28 D vs. 0.94 ± 0.30 D, P < 0.001) and superior UDVA (0.15 ± 0.03 vs. 0.20 ± 0.03 LogMAR, P < 0.001) compared to the LRI group. No differences in BCVA were observed. Subjective satisfaction was significantly higher in the toric IOL group (P = 0.009). Toric IOL provide more favorable refractive and subjective outcomes than LRI for correcting moderate astigmatism during cataract surgery. These findings support a personalized approach that considers visual expectations, cost, and access to technology.
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.