MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376113827 · doi:10.3928/1081597x-20230308-01

Toric Trifocal Intraocular Lens for Refractive Lens Exchange: A Multi-center, Multi-surgeon Large Cohort Study

2023· article· en· W4376113827 on OpenAlexaff
Avi Wallerstein, Mathieu Gauvin, Pierre Trottier, Mark E. Cohen, John B. Lloyd, Louis Racine, Darren Albert, Iqbal Ike K. Ahmed, Michael Mimouni

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Refractive Surgery · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsMuscular Dystrophy Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDioptreOphthalmologyAstigmatismMedicineIntraocular lensIntraocular lensesOptometryVisual acuityOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To assess the outcomes of a novel toric trifocal intraocular lens (IOL) for refractive lens exchange (RLE) in a large series of eyes with corneal astigmatism. Methods: Consecutive eyes that underwent RLE with the PanOptix Toric IOL (Alcon Laboratories, Inc) were included. Outcomes measures included postoperative distance (UDVA), 60 cm intermediate (UIVA), and 40 cm near (UNVA) uncorrected visual acuity, manifest refraction, spherical and defocus equivalent, efficacy and safety indices, and vector analyses of refractive and toric IOL accuracy. Results: A total of 4,933 eyes had a median follow-up of 3 months. UDVA of 20/20 and 20/40 was obtained in 65% and 99% of eyes monocularly and 87% and 100% binocularly, respectively. UIVA at 60 cm of 20/25 and 20/40 was achieved in 70% and 99% of eyes monocularly and in 77% and 100% binocularly, respectively. UNVA at 40 cm of 20/25 and 20/40 was achieved in 85% and 96% of eyes monocularly and in 95% and 100% binocularly, respectively. A total of 67%, 89%, 97%, and 99% of eyes had a SEQ within 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, and 1.00 diopter (D) of intended target ( R 2 = 0.99). Postoperative refractive astigmatism of 0.50, 0.75, and 1.00 D or less was achieved in 86%, 95%, and 98% of eyes. The vector analysis correction index and index of success were 1.04 ± 0.35 and 0.41 ± 0.31 for toric IOL accuracy and 1.00 ± 0.46 and 0.36 ± 0.55 for refractive accuracy, respectively. The 3- and 12-month post-RLE excimer laser enhancement rates were 1.1% (95% CI: 0.8% to 1.4%) and 7.6% (95% CI: 6.9% to 8.3%), respectively. Conclusions: The PanOptix Toric IOL performed well for a wide range of axial lengths and corneal astigmatism in eyes that had RLE. Most patients achieved effective uncorrected binocular near, intermediate, and distance vision for daily functioning. [ J Refract Surg . 2023;39(5):302–310.]

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.112
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Refractive SurgerySame topicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment StudiesFrench-language works237,207