ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2026
Comparative Clinical Outcomes of a 1.0% Versus 1.4% Sodium Hyaluronate OVD in Cataract Surgery: A Prospective Study.
Article 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMaintaining anterior chamber space and protecting the endothelial layer during surgery is the primary role of ophthalmic viscosurgical devices (OVD), which have made them an integral part of the surgery for decades now. This study evaluated sodium hyaluronate-based OVDs BIO-HYALUR (1%) and Protectalon 1.4% in terms of their performance and safety during cataract surgery.
methodsThis was a prospective, comparative, randomized clinical study involving patients undergoing cataract surgery. The primary endpoint was the incidence of intraocular pressure (IOP) rise > 30 mmHg; other clinical parameters including visual acuity, endothelial cell density (ECD) and morphology, corneal thickness, intraocular inflammation, and intraoperative parameters (phacoemulsification metrics, space maintenance, and surgeon performance rating) were also compared. Postoperative evaluations were conducted at 8 ± 2 h, 24 ± 4 h, 7 ± 2 days, 30 ± 7 days, and 90 ± 14 days.
resultsThe study included 140 patients (70 in each group) with a mean age of 63.8 ± 7.09 years and 63.4 ± 8.81 years for the BIO-HYALUR group and the Protectalon group, respectively. No patient in either of the groups showed an incident of IOP > 30 mmHg during the study period. ECD showed no clinically meaningful loss postoperatively in either of the groups. Intraocular inflammation was completely resolved by 7 ± 2 days, and lens and corneal clarity was achieved by 24 ± 4 h in both groups. No statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups for visual acuity and corneal thickness. Full chambered space maintenance was achieved in all cases (100%). Ease of use was rated as "excellent" in the vast majority of cases in both groups. No adverse events or intraoperative complications were observed during the study.
conclusionBIO-HYALUR and Protectalon 1.4% are safe and reliable OVDs in terms of intra- and postoperative parameters, and both OVDs are suitable for cataract surgery.
trial registrationCTRI/2023/03/050365.
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.