Trial reportBMC ophthalmology2025
Novel syringe handle for one-handed anterior chamber paracentesis.
Trial report in BMC ophthalmology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAnterior chamber (AC) paracentesis is a valuable diagnostic and therapeutic ophthalmic procedure, but the conventional technique poses ergonomic and safety challenges.
methodsWe developed a custom, low-cost, 3D-printed syringe handle that enables one-handed AC paracentesis using standard 1-mL syringes by allowing single-finger plunger retraction. In a randomized controlled wet-lab study, ten ophthalmology residents each performed four AC paracentesis procedures (two with the novel device, two with the conventional technique) on porcine eyes. The primary outcome was successful aspiration of ≥ 100 µL of aqueous humor. Secondary outcomes included intraocular injury, aspirated volume, procedure time, and responses to an anonymous post-procedure survey.
resultsAll AC paracentesis procedures achieved ≥ 100 µL of fluid. No intraocular injuries occurred with the novel device, compared to 2 intraocular tissue contacts with the conventional method. The median aspirated volume was 120 µL (interquartile range [IQR]: 110-150 µL) with the novel device, close to the 100 µL threshold, with no extractions exceeding 200 µL. In contrast, the conventional method yielded a significantly higher median volume of 200 µL (IQR 140-270 µL; P < 0.001), with 25% of procedures exceeding 250 µL. The median procedure time was 26.9 s with the novel device versus 35.7 s with the conventional method, a 8.8 s (25%) reduction (P = 0.13). Participants generally preferred the novel device for ease of use, control, and perceived safety. Nine of 10 participants reported feeling more or much more confident about performing AC paracentesis safely with the novel syringe handle than with the conventional technique.
conclusionsWe developed a novel syringe handle for one-handed AC paracentesis, which improved the safety and precision of the procedure while reducing procedural time. Its low-cost, reusable design and compatibility with standard syringes make it a practical tool for the procedure. Further clinical studies are warranted to explore broader applications.
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.