ArticleBMC ophthalmology2026
Visual and refractive outcomes of small incision lenticule extraction planned with a VISULYZE-generated nomogram for myopia and astigmatism: a retrospective comparative study.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSmall-incision lenticule extraction (SMILE) is a widely used procedure for correcting myopia and myopic astigmatism. However, variability in refractive outcomes, particularly astigmatic correction, remains a concern. This study aimed to compare visual, refractive, and optical outcomes of SMILE planned with a VISULYZE-generated nomogram versus a conventional nomogram in patients with moderate myopia and astigmatism.
methodsThis retrospective comparative study included 120 eyes from 60 consecutive patients. Eyes were allocated to groups at the eye level, with both eyes from the same patient potentially included and independently assigned to either the VISULYZE-generated nomogram group (60 eyes) or the conventional nomogram group (60 eyes). Visual acuity, refractive outcomes, astigmatic axis deviation, and higher-order aberrations (HOAs) were evaluated preoperatively and at 3 months postoperatively. Statistical analyses accounted for inter-eye correlation using mixed-effects models to properly consider the independence of observations.
resultsPreoperative demographic and refractive characteristics were comparable between groups. At 3 months postoperatively, a higher proportion of eyes in the VISULYZE-generated nomogram group achieved uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) of 20/20 or better than in the conventional group. With respect to astigmatic axis deviation and residual astigmatism, the VISULYZE group showed numerical trends toward closer alignment, although differences did not reach statistical significance. Postoperative increases in total HOAs and coma were observed in both groups, with smaller increases in the VISULYZE group. Changes in spherical aberration and trefoil were minimal and comparable between groups.
conclusionSMILE planned with a VISULYZE-generated nomogram was associated with differences in early visual, refractive, and optical outcomes compared with conventional nomogram planning. VISULYZE-generated nomogram group has lower HOAS. Both groups' total HOAs and coma increases postoperatively, with smaller increases in the VISULYZE group.
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.