A Randomized, Double-Blind, Contralateral Eye Study Comparing the Clinical Outcomes of Two Types of Silicone Hydrogel Bandage Contact Lenses After Transepithelial Photorefractive Keratectomy.

Ling Wang, Jiajia Jin, Lu Yan, Kaiyan Huang, Shihao Chen

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Ling WangNational Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325027, China.ORCID 0000-0002-4328-0968

Jiajia JinNational Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325027, China.

Lu YanNational Engineering Research Center of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325027, China.

Kaiyan HuangNational Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325027, China.

Shihao ChenNational Clinical Research Center for Ocular Diseases, Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325027, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo compare clinical outcomes of Lotrafilcon A and Balafilcon A silicone hydrogel bandage contact lenses (BCLs) following transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (TPRK).

methodsA randomized, double-blind, contralateral eye study enrolled 41 TPRK patients (82 eyes), with each eye randomly assigned one BCL type. Assessments included uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected (CDVA) distance visual acuity, ocular pain and irritation, epithelial healing, limbal and conjunctival hyperemia, lens mobility, and the amount of protein deposition on the BCLs.

resultsPostoperative day 1 pain score was lower in Group A (2.80 ± 2.35) than in Group B (4.44 ± 2.46,

conclusionsLotrafilcon A outperformed Balafilcon A in reducing ocular pain, foreign body sensation, and protein deposition, suggesting that Lotrafilcon A may be a more suitable therapeutic BCL option following TPRK.

Indexed as

Balafilcon Abandage contact lensLotrafilcon Asilicone hydrogeltransepithelial photorefractive keratectomy (TPRK)

Identifiers

PMID41595971

DOI10.3390/bioengineering13010039

PMCPMC12837204

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.