ArticleCureus2026
A Prospective Observational Study Comparing Hybrid Acrylic and Collamer Posterior Chamber Phakic Intraocular Lenses for High Myopia.
Article in Cureus, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate clinical outcomes following implantation of two types of posterior chamber phakic intraocular lenses: a reinforced hydrophilic acrylic implantable phakic contact lens IPCL (model V2.0; Care Group, Baroda, India) and a Collamer implantable phakic contact lens Visian ICL (model V4c; Staar Surgical Co., Monrovia, CA) for the treatment of high myopia (more myopic than -5.00 Dioptre) in adults.
objectiveTo compare visual and refractive outcomes and postoperative complications between a reinforced hydrophilic acrylic implantable phakic contact lens IPCL and a Collamer implantable phakic contact lens Visian ICL for the treatment of high myopia and myopic astigmatism in adults. METHODOLOGY: This is a prospective, observational study in a tertiary ophthalmic care centre in Varanasi, India. Fifty-five eyes from 55 patients with high myopia or myopic astigmatism were included in the study. Group A (27 eyes) received implantable phakic contact lens IPCLs, and Group B (28 eyes) received implantable Collamer lens ICLs. All patients underwent preoperative assessments, including optical biometry, keratometry, axial length, central corneal thickness, and white-to-white measurement. Postoperative evaluations were conducted at 1, 6, and 12 months, assessing uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), refractive stability, and adverse effects.
resultsBoth groups showed statistically significant improvement in visual acuity over 12 months. Preoperative mean LogMAR BCVA was 0.411 ± 0.191 (Group A) and 0.366 ± 0.277 (Group B). At 12 months, mean postoperative LogMAR UCVA was 0.268 ± 0.202 (Group A) and 0.146 ± 0.133 (Group B). Anterior uveitis with intraocular pressure elevation occurred in four eyes (14.8%) in Group A and four eyes (14.3%) in Group B at one week. Glare and halos were reported in eight eyes (29.6%) in Group A and six eyes (21.4%) in Group B during late follow-up.
conclusionBoth the IPCL and ICL are effective and safe options for correcting high myopia. ICL showed superior visual outcomes as compared to IPCL with comparable complication rates. Though affordability was not assessed, the reinforced acrylic lens remained a potentially lower-cost material, offering meaningful refractive correction.
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.