Sutured Scleral-Fixated Versus Anterior Chamber Intraocular Lens Implantation: A Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: No consensus exists on the comparative efficacy and safety of sutured scleral-fixated (SSF) and anterior chamber (AC) intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. We aim to compare outcomes of these two techniques. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL was conducted (2005 to 2020). Studies comparing SSFIOLs with ACIOLs were included. Outcomes included corrected distance visual acuity and complications. A meta-analysis was conducted with a random effects model. Weighted mean differences and risk ratios with 95% CIs were computed. RESULTS: Seven hundred eighty-three eyes from nine studies were included. SSFIOLs had a significantly higher absolute postoperative spherical equivalent (weighted mean difference, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.60; P = .03; low certainty) and incidence of IOL decentration/subluxation (risk ratio, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.03 to 7.01; P = .04; moderate certainty) than ACIOLs. There was no difference in final corrected distance visual acuity ( P = .26). CONCLUSIONS: SSFIOLs have a higher absolute postoperative spherical equivalent and incidence of IOL decentration/subluxation than ACIOLs. Future prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings. [ Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retin a. 2022;53:12–21.]
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".