ArticleBMC ophthalmology2026
Incidence of posterior vitreous detachment after three different types of laser refractive surgery.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the incidence of posterior vitreous detachment (PVD) after small incision lenticule extraction (SMILE), femtosecond laser in situ keratomileusis (FS-LASIK), and transepithelial photorefractive keratectomy(T-PRK), and to evaluate its potential risk factors and association with early postoperative visual and refractive outcomes.
methodsPatients who met the eligibility criteria for SMILE, FS-LASIK, or T-PRK after comprehensive preoperative evaluation were enrolled. B-scan ultrasonography was performed by a single operator one day before surgery, and patients with preoperative PVD were excluded. Finally, 24 patients (45 eyes) were included in the SMILE group (Group S), 21 patients (39 eyes) in the FS-LASIK group (Group F), and 22 patients (44 eyes) in the T-PRK group (Group T). All procedures were performed by the same surgeon. B-scan ultrasonography was repeated by the same operator 1 week after surgery to detect newly developed PVD.
resultsThe mean age was 21.5 ± 5.56 years, 23.9 ± 5.00 years, and 22.9 ± 4.56 years in Groups S, F, and T, respectively (p = 0.484). The mean axial length was 25.80 ± 0.87 mm, 25.91 ± 0.80 mm, and 25.72 ± 0.94 mm, respectively (p = 0.603), and the mean spherical equivalent was -4.65 ± 1.49 D, -5.33 ± 1.79 D, and -4.70 ± 1.36 D, respectively (p = 0.080). Postoperative PVD was detected in 9 eyes in Group S (20.0%; 95% CI, 9.6%-34.6%), 7 eyes in Group F (17.9%; 95% CI, 7.5%-33.5%), and 5 eyes in Group T (11.4%; 95% CI, 3.8%-24.6%) (p = 0.570).
conclusionsNo statistically significant difference in early postoperative PVD incidence was observed among SMILE, FS-LASIK, and T-PRK within one week after surgery. Further studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up are needed to confirm these findings.
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.