ReviewOphthalmology and therapy2026
Visual Outcomes and Safety of Ray-Tracing-Guided Laser-Assisted In Situ Keratomileusis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Ophthalmology and therapy, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
topicThe aim of this analysis was to evaluate the visual outcome and safety profile after ray-tracing-guided laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (RTG-LASIK) for myopia with or without astigmatism. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: RTG-LASIK is a modern approach in refractive surgery using only objective and automated measurements aiming to improve visual outcomes.
methodsIn this systematic literature review and meta-analysis (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews [PROSPERO] ID: CRD420251179631), original peer-reviewed clinical studies on the visual outcomes of RTG-LASIK in eyes with myopia ± astigmatism were included. Exclusion criteria were corneal ectasia or other ocular comorbidities, hyperopia, and ablation profile modification by the surgeon. Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases were screened on 31 October 2025. The risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies-of Interventions tool. Primary effect measures were the proportions of eyes achieving 20/20 uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and losing ≥ 1 line of corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) after RTG-LASIK. Secondary outcomes included the distribution of eyes regarding preoperative CDVA and postoperative UDVA, changes in Snellen lines for CDVA and UDVA relative to preoperative CDVA, postoperative manifest refraction spherical equivalent (MRSE), higher-order aberrations (HOAs), and other refractive parameters, synthesized using a random-effects model. In addition, postoperative complications were documented.
resultsIn total, 14 clinical studies with a total of 1577 eyes were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled percentage of eyes with postoperative UDVA ≥ 20/20 was 99.17% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 95.75%, 99.84%; I DISCUSSION: This meta-analysis suggests that RTG-LASIK may be a safe and effective procedure for improving UDVA and CDVA in selected myopic eyes in the short term, with relatively low reported complication rates. However, larger prospective studies with longer follow-up are needed to confirm these findings and better define long-term safety and efficacy.
trial registrationThis systematic review and meta-analysis has been prospectively registered at PROSPERO (PROSPERO ID: CRD420251179631).
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.