ArticleInternational ophthalmology2026
Evaluation of ocular surface retention of artificial tears by scintigraphy.
Article in International 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the early phase ocular surface retention of five artificial tear formulations using lacrimal scintigraphy. MATERIALS AND
methodsSixteen participants (25-42 years) without ocular or systemic disease were enrolled between January 2023 and January 2025, and both eyes were included. Each subject attended three alternate-day sessions and received one Tc-99 m-labeled drop (150 µCi) per eye per session according to predefined formulation pairs: HP guar + sodium hyaluronate (SH) versus saline; trehalose + SH versus dexpanthenol + SH; and SH alone versus polyvinyl alcohol + povidone. Ten-minute dynamic lacrimal scintigraphy was performed following each instillation to evaluate early-phase pre-corneal retention dynamics. Regions of interest were automatically tracked and manually corrected when required. Absolute scintigraphic counts and baseline-normalized 5/0-min and 10/0-min ratios were calculated. A total of 48 dynamic scans were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models with Dunn-Bonferroni post-hoc testing.
resultsScintigraphic counts decreased significantly over time (p < 0.001), with a significant overall difference among formulations (p = 0.006) and no group × time interaction (p = 0.279). Baseline-normalized ratios similarly demonstrated significant group and time effects (each p < 0.001). HP guar + SH showed greater normalized retention than saline (p = 0.031), and trehalose + SH likewise exceeded saline (p = 0.003). HP guar + SH demonstrated the highest overall retention across formulations and showed a numerical advantage over dexpanthenol + SH (MD = 0.117), though not statistically significant (p = 0.155).
conclusionsPolymer-hyaluronate combinations, particularly HP guar + SH and trehalose + SH, demonstrated greater early-phase ocular surface retention dynamics compared with saline and several other tested formulations within the observed imaging period. HP guar + SH showed the highest overall retention profile among the evaluated preparations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42484903What 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.