ArticleScientific reports2026
AI-guided surgical decision support system for corneal laceration repair: a prospective, non-randomized controlled feasibility study.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To evaluate the feasibility and application value of a transfer learning-based artificial intelligence (AI) system for wound recognition and suture position planning in patients with corneal lacerations. In this prospective, non-randomized controlled feasibility study, 25 consecutive patients were managed with either conventional suturing (n = 14) or AI-guided planning (n = 11) based on real-time system availability. The AI system automatically identified corneal laceration images and generated suture points. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA, logMAR) and cylinder (Cyl, diopters (D)) were recorded. Anterior corneal surface parameters, including corneal surface variation index (ISV), vertical asymmetry index (IVA), high asymmetry index (IHA), high eccentricity index (IHD), and minimum curvature radius (Rmin), were measured using Pentacam. All patients were followed up for at least 6 months. The transfer learning model achieved over 85% accuracy and sensitivity in corneal laceration recognition. AI guidance significantly improved visual outcomes, with a higher BCVA (0.677 vs. 0.331 logMAR, P < 0.05) and reduced astigmatism (Cyl: 2.023 D vs. 3.542 D, P < 0.05) compared to conventional suturing, and improved ISV, IVA, and IHA (all P < 0.05) compared to the conventional group. This feasibility study provides preliminary evidence that transfer learning-based wound recognition and suture position planning can be applied to corneal laceration treatment, suggesting its potential to provide more precise and effective suturing strategies for corneal trauma patients. Further validation with larger cohorts is warranted.
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.