ArticleIndian journal of ophthalmology2026
Comparative recovery of central corneal sensitivity after conventional phacoemulsification and femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery.
Article in Indian journal of 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare early postoperative changes in central corneal sensitivity following conventional phacoemulsification and femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS).
methodsThis prospective two-arm cohort study included 74 patients (148 eyes) with age-related cataract who underwent either phacoemulsification (88 eyes) or FLACS (60 eyes) performed by a single surgeon between July 2024 and March 2025. Central corneal sensitivity was measured using a Cochet-Bonnet esthesiometer preoperatively and at 30 and 90 days. Outcome assessors were masked to the surgical technique. Propensity score matching and generalized estimating equations were applied to adjust for baseline differences and within-patient correlation. The primary endpoint was sensitivity at 90 days adjusted for baseline.
resultsBaseline sensitivity was slightly higher in FLACS eyes (46.08 ± 8.87 mm) compared with phacoemulsification (42.63 ± 7.18 mm, P = 0.012). At 30 days, both groups demonstrated significant reductions from baseline ( P < 0.001), with no significant intergroup difference. By 90 days, sensitivity in the phacoemulsification group recovered partially but remained below baseline (40.23 ± 7.80 mm, P = 0.001), whereas sensitivity in the FLACS group returned near baseline (45.25 ± 9.13 mm, P = 0.07). Adjusted analysis favored FLACS at 90 days (mean difference: 5.02 mm; 95% CI: 2.2-7.8; P < 0.001). In the FLACS group, younger age and higher baseline sensitivity were associated with better recovery.
conclusionBoth techniques caused early postoperative hypoesthesia, but FLACS demonstrated faster and more complete recovery of corneal sensitivity by 90 days. This neurosensory advantage may be particularly relevant for patients predisposed to ocular surface dysfunction.
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.