ArticleBMC ophthalmology2026
Efficacy comparison of moderate to severe astigmatism: implantable collamer lens combined with paired opposite clear corneal incisions versus toric implantable collamer lens.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the efficacy of Implantable Collamer Lens (ICL) combined with paired opposite clear corneal incisions (OCCI) versus Toric Implantable Collamer Lens (TICL) for moderate to severe astigmatism.
methodsThis retrospective comparative study included 40 patients with moderate to severe astigmatism (cylinder 1·5D-3·0D). Based on patient preference, 20 eyes underwent TICL implantation (TICL group) and 20 eyes underwent ICL with OCCI (OCCI group). Preoperative and 6-month postoperative data were analyzed, including uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity (UDVA, CDVA), refraction, higher-order aberrations (HOAs), and Alpins vector parameters (target-induced astigmatism [TIA], surgically induced astigmatism [SIA], difference vector [DV], correction index [CI], angle of error [AE]).
resultsAt 6 months postoperatively, both groups showed significant visual improvement. The proportion achieving UDVA ≥ 20/20 was 100% in TICL group and 95% in OCCI group. Residual astigmatism ≤ 1·0D was achieved in 95% (TICL) and 90% (OCCI). Spherical equivalent within ±1·0D was 95% and 90%, respectively. OCCI induced significantly more HOAs, horizontal coma, and horizontal trefoil postoperatively compared to TICL (all p < 0.05). Vector analysis showed no significant between-group differences in TIA, SIA, DV, CI, or AE (all p > 0.05).
conclusionsICL combined with OCCI yields acceptable visual and refractive outcomes for moderate to severe astigmatism, though slightly inferior to TICL in accuracy and HOAs. It represents a viable alternative when TICL is unavailable or contraindicated.
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.