HapticV1, PascalFrancis, Curation, bibRecord, 000625

Comparison of posterior capsule opacification rates between hydrophilic and hydrophobic single-piece acrylic intraocular lenses

Identifieur interne : 000625 ( PascalFrancis/Curation ); précédent : 000624; suivant : 000626

Comparison of posterior capsule opacification rates between hydrophilic and hydrophobic single-piece acrylic intraocular lenses

Auteurs : Catherine J. Heatley [Royaume-Uni] ; David J. Spalton [Royaume-Uni] ; Anupma Kumar [Royaume-Uni] ; Romina Jose [Royaume-Uni] ; James Boyce [Royaume-Uni] ; Lloyd E. Bender [Royaume-Uni]

Source :

Journal of cataract and refractive surgery [ 0886-3350 ] ; 2005.

RBID : Pascal:05-0285212

Descripteurs français

Pascal (Inist)
- Etude comparative, Postérieur, Capsule, Opacification, Taux, Hydrophilie, Lentille intraoculaire, Chirurgie, Ophtalmologie.
Wicri :
- topic : Chirurgie.

English descriptors

KwdEn :
- Capsule, Comparative study, Hydrophily, Intraocular lens, Opacification, Ophthalmology, Posterior, Rate, Surgery.

Abstract

Purpose: To determine the effect of intraocular lens (IOL) material on the development of posterior capsule opacification (PCO) at 1 year. Setting: Department of Ophthalmology, St. Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom. Methods: One hundred six eyes of 53 patients with bilateral cataract and no other ocular comorbidity were prospectively randomized to receive a hydrophobic acrylic or hydrophilic acrylic single-piece IOL in the first eye to have surgery. The alternate IOL was implanted in the fellow eye 4 to 6 weeks later. All surgery was performed by a single surgeon. Postoperative follow-up was 1 day, 1 and 6 months, and 1 year. At each visit, the best corrected high- and low-contrast visual acuities were assessed and a high-intensity digital retroillumination photograph was taken. Posterior capsule opacification was assessed from the digital images by a single operator using a dedicated software program and calculated as the percentage area of opacified capsule. Results: One year postoperatively, the median percentage area of PCO was 50.3% in the hydrophilic IOL group and 4.9% in the hydrophobic IOL group (P<.001). The difference in PCO was not accounted for by loss of contact between the capsulorhexis and IOL surface. Further analysis showed that lens epithelial cells tended to invade the posterior capsule at the haptic-optic junction. This was more marked in the hydrophilic IOL group. Conclusions: The rate of PCO was significantly higher with the hydrophilic IOL. However, the results cannot be attributed to the IOL material alone as they show the importance of both IOL material and design.

A01	`01`	`1`		`@0 0886-3350`
A02	`01`			`@0 JCSUEV`
A03		`1`		`@0 J. cataract refractive surg.`
A05				`@2 31`
A06				`@2 4`
A08	`01`	`1`	`ENG`	`@1 Comparison of posterior capsule opacification rates between hydrophilic and hydrophobic single-piece acrylic intraocular lenses`
A11	`01`	`1`		`@1 HEATLEY (Catherine J.)`
A11	`02`	`1`		`@1 SPALTON (David J.)`
A11	`03`	`1`		`@1 KUMAR (Anupma)`
A11	`04`	`1`		`@1 JOSE (Romina)`
A11	`05`	`1`		`@1 BOYCE (James)`
A11	`06`	`1`		`@1 BENDER (Lloyd E.)`
A14	`01`			`@1 Department of Ophthalmology, St. Thomas' Hospital @3 GBR @Z 1 aut. @Z 2 aut. @Z 3 aut. @Z 6 aut.`
A14	`02`			`@1 Department of Physics, Kings College London @2 London @3 GBR @Z 4 aut. @Z 5 aut.`
A20				`@1 718-724`
A21				`@1 2005`
A23	`01`			`@0 ENG`
A43	`01`			`@1 INIST @2 20937 @5 354000138053470100`
A44				`@0 0000 @1 © 2005 INIST-CNRS. All rights reserved.`
A45				`@0 28 ref.`
A47	`01`	`1`		`@0 05-0285212`
A60				`@1 P`
A61				`@0 A`
A64	`01`	`1`		`@0 Journal of cataract and refractive surgery`
A66	`01`			`@0 USA`
C01	`01`		`ENG`	@0 Purpose: To determine the effect of intraocular lens (IOL) material on the development of posterior capsule opacification (PCO) at 1 year. Setting: Department of Ophthalmology, St. Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom. Methods: One hundred six eyes of 53 patients with bilateral cataract and no other ocular comorbidity were prospectively randomized to receive a hydrophobic acrylic or hydrophilic acrylic single-piece IOL in the first eye to have surgery. The alternate IOL was implanted in the fellow eye 4 to 6 weeks later. All surgery was performed by a single surgeon. Postoperative follow-up was 1 day, 1 and 6 months, and 1 year. At each visit, the best corrected high- and low-contrast visual acuities were assessed and a high-intensity digital retroillumination photograph was taken. Posterior capsule opacification was assessed from the digital images by a single operator using a dedicated software program and calculated as the percentage area of opacified capsule. Results: One year postoperatively, the median percentage area of PCO was 50.3% in the hydrophilic IOL group and 4.9% in the hydrophobic IOL group (P<.001). The difference in PCO was not accounted for by loss of contact between the capsulorhexis and IOL surface. Further analysis showed that lens epithelial cells tended to invade the posterior capsule at the haptic-optic junction. This was more marked in the hydrophilic IOL group. Conclusions: The rate of PCO was significantly higher with the hydrophilic IOL. However, the results cannot be attributed to the IOL material alone as they show the importance of both IOL material and design.
C02	`01`	`X`		`@0 002B25B`
C03	`01`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Etude comparative @5 02`
C03	`01`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Comparative study @5 02`
C03	`01`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Estudio comparativo @5 02`
C03	`02`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Postérieur @5 03`
C03	`02`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Posterior @5 03`
C03	`02`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Posterior @5 03`
C03	`03`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Capsule @5 05`
C03	`03`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Capsule @5 05`
C03	`03`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Cápsula @5 05`
C03	`04`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Opacification @5 06`
C03	`04`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Opacification @5 06`
C03	`04`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Opacificación @5 06`
C03	`05`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Taux @5 08`
C03	`05`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Rate @5 08`
C03	`05`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Tasa @5 08`
C03	`06`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Hydrophilie @5 09`
C03	`06`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Hydrophily @5 09`
C03	`06`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Hidrofilia @5 09`
C03	`07`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Lentille intraoculaire @5 11`
C03	`07`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Intraocular lens @5 11`
C03	`07`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Lente intraocular @5 11`
C03	`08`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Chirurgie @5 12`
C03	`08`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Surgery @5 12`
C03	`08`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Cirugía @5 12`
C03	`09`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Ophtalmologie @5 14`
C03	`09`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Ophthalmology @5 14`
C03	`09`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Oftalmología @5 14`
N21				`@1 199`
N44	`01`			`@1 OTO`
N82				`@1 OTO`

Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)

to stream PascalFrancis, to step Corpus: Pour aller vers cette notice dans l'étape Curation :000E83

Links to Exploration step

Pascal:05-0285212

Le document en format XML

<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en" level="a">Comparison of posterior capsule opacification rates between hydrophilic and hydrophobic single-piece acrylic intraocular lenses</title>
<author><name sortKey="Heatley, Catherine J" sort="Heatley, Catherine J" uniqKey="Heatley C" first="Catherine J." last="Heatley">Catherine J. Heatley</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1"><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Ophthalmology, St. Thomas' Hospital</s1>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
<country>Royaume-Uni</country>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Spalton, David J" sort="Spalton, David J" uniqKey="Spalton D" first="David J." last="Spalton">David J. Spalton</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1"><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Ophthalmology, St. Thomas' Hospital</s1>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
<country>Royaume-Uni</country>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Kumar, Anupma" sort="Kumar, Anupma" uniqKey="Kumar A" first="Anupma" last="Kumar">Anupma Kumar</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1"><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Ophthalmology, St. Thomas' Hospital</s1>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
<country>Royaume-Uni</country>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Jose, Romina" sort="Jose, Romina" uniqKey="Jose R" first="Romina" last="Jose">Romina Jose</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1"><inist:fA14 i1="02"><s1>Department of Physics, Kings College London</s1>
<s2>London</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
<country>Royaume-Uni</country>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Boyce, James" sort="Boyce, James" uniqKey="Boyce J" first="James" last="Boyce">James Boyce</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1"><inist:fA14 i1="02"><s1>Department of Physics, Kings College London</s1>
<s2>London</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
<country>Royaume-Uni</country>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Bender, Lloyd E" sort="Bender, Lloyd E" uniqKey="Bender L" first="Lloyd E." last="Bender">Lloyd E. Bender</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1"><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Ophthalmology, St. Thomas' Hospital</s1>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
<country>Royaume-Uni</country>
</affiliation>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">INIST</idno>
<idno type="inist">05-0285212</idno>
<date when="2005">2005</date>
<idno type="stanalyst">PASCAL 05-0285212 INIST</idno>
<idno type="RBID">Pascal:05-0285212</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/PascalFrancis/Corpus">000E83</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/PascalFrancis/Curation">000625</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en" level="a">Comparison of posterior capsule opacification rates between hydrophilic and hydrophobic single-piece acrylic intraocular lenses</title>
<author><name sortKey="Heatley, Catherine J" sort="Heatley, Catherine J" uniqKey="Heatley C" first="Catherine J." last="Heatley">Catherine J. Heatley</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1"><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Ophthalmology, St. Thomas' Hospital</s1>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
<country>Royaume-Uni</country>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Spalton, David J" sort="Spalton, David J" uniqKey="Spalton D" first="David J." last="Spalton">David J. Spalton</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1"><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Ophthalmology, St. Thomas' Hospital</s1>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
<country>Royaume-Uni</country>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Kumar, Anupma" sort="Kumar, Anupma" uniqKey="Kumar A" first="Anupma" last="Kumar">Anupma Kumar</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1"><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Ophthalmology, St. Thomas' Hospital</s1>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
<country>Royaume-Uni</country>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Jose, Romina" sort="Jose, Romina" uniqKey="Jose R" first="Romina" last="Jose">Romina Jose</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1"><inist:fA14 i1="02"><s1>Department of Physics, Kings College London</s1>
<s2>London</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
<country>Royaume-Uni</country>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Boyce, James" sort="Boyce, James" uniqKey="Boyce J" first="James" last="Boyce">James Boyce</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1"><inist:fA14 i1="02"><s1>Department of Physics, Kings College London</s1>
<s2>London</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
<country>Royaume-Uni</country>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Bender, Lloyd E" sort="Bender, Lloyd E" uniqKey="Bender L" first="Lloyd E." last="Bender">Lloyd E. Bender</name>
<affiliation wicri:level="1"><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Ophthalmology, St. Thomas' Hospital</s1>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
<country>Royaume-Uni</country>
</affiliation>
</author>
</analytic>
<series><title level="j" type="main">Journal of cataract and refractive surgery</title>
<title level="j" type="abbreviated">J. cataract refractive surg.</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0886-3350</idno>
<imprint><date when="2005">2005</date>
</imprint>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
<seriesStmt><title level="j" type="main">Journal of cataract and refractive surgery</title>
<title level="j" type="abbreviated">J. cataract refractive surg.</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0886-3350</idno>
</seriesStmt>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Capsule</term>
<term>Comparative study</term>
<term>Hydrophily</term>
<term>Intraocular lens</term>
<term>Opacification</term>
<term>Ophthalmology</term>
<term>Posterior</term>
<term>Rate</term>
<term>Surgery</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Pascal" xml:lang="fr"><term>Etude comparative</term>
<term>Postérieur</term>
<term>Capsule</term>
<term>Opacification</term>
<term>Taux</term>
<term>Hydrophilie</term>
<term>Lentille intraoculaire</term>
<term>Chirurgie</term>
<term>Ophtalmologie</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Wicri" type="topic" xml:lang="fr"><term>Chirurgie</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Purpose: To determine the effect of intraocular lens (IOL) material on the development of posterior capsule opacification (PCO) at 1 year. Setting: Department of Ophthalmology, St. Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom. Methods: One hundred six eyes of 53 patients with bilateral cataract and no other ocular comorbidity were prospectively randomized to receive a hydrophobic acrylic or hydrophilic acrylic single-piece IOL in the first eye to have surgery. The alternate IOL was implanted in the fellow eye 4 to 6 weeks later. All surgery was performed by a single surgeon. Postoperative follow-up was 1 day, 1 and 6 months, and 1 year. At each visit, the best corrected high- and low-contrast visual acuities were assessed and a high-intensity digital retroillumination photograph was taken. Posterior capsule opacification was assessed from the digital images by a single operator using a dedicated software program and calculated as the percentage area of opacified capsule. Results: One year postoperatively, the median percentage area of PCO was 50.3% in the hydrophilic IOL group and 4.9% in the hydrophobic IOL group (P<.001). The difference in PCO was not accounted for by loss of contact between the capsulorhexis and IOL surface. Further analysis showed that lens epithelial cells tended to invade the posterior capsule at the haptic-optic junction. This was more marked in the hydrophilic IOL group. Conclusions: The rate of PCO was significantly higher with the hydrophilic IOL. However, the results cannot be attributed to the IOL material alone as they show the importance of both IOL material and design.</div>
</front>
</TEI>
<inist><standard h6="B"><pA><fA01 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>0886-3350</s0>
</fA01>
<fA02 i1="01"><s0>JCSUEV</s0>
</fA02>
<fA03 i2="1"><s0>J. cataract refractive surg.</s0>
</fA03>
<fA05><s2>31</s2>
</fA05>
<fA06><s2>4</s2>
</fA06>
<fA08 i1="01" i2="1" l="ENG"><s1>Comparison of posterior capsule opacification rates between hydrophilic and hydrophobic single-piece acrylic intraocular lenses</s1>
</fA08>
<fA11 i1="01" i2="1"><s1>HEATLEY (Catherine J.)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="02" i2="1"><s1>SPALTON (David J.)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="03" i2="1"><s1>KUMAR (Anupma)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="04" i2="1"><s1>JOSE (Romina)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="05" i2="1"><s1>BOYCE (James)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="06" i2="1"><s1>BENDER (Lloyd E.)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA14 i1="01"><s1>Department of Ophthalmology, St. Thomas' Hospital</s1>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>6 aut.</sZ>
</fA14>
<fA14 i1="02"><s1>Department of Physics, Kings College London</s1>
<s2>London</s2>
<s3>GBR</s3>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>5 aut.</sZ>
</fA14>
<fA20><s1>718-724</s1>
</fA20>
<fA21><s1>2005</s1>
</fA21>
<fA23 i1="01"><s0>ENG</s0>
</fA23>
<fA43 i1="01"><s1>INIST</s1>
<s2>20937</s2>
<s5>354000138053470100</s5>
</fA43>
<fA44><s0>0000</s0>
<s1>© 2005 INIST-CNRS. All rights reserved.</s1>
</fA44>
<fA45><s0>28 ref.</s0>
</fA45>
<fA47 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>05-0285212</s0>
</fA47>
<fA60><s1>P</s1>
</fA60>
<fA61><s0>A</s0>
</fA61>
<fA64 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>Journal of cataract and refractive surgery</s0>
</fA64>
<fA66 i1="01"><s0>USA</s0>
</fA66>
<fC01 i1="01" l="ENG"><s0>Purpose: To determine the effect of intraocular lens (IOL) material on the development of posterior capsule opacification (PCO) at 1 year. Setting: Department of Ophthalmology, St. Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom. Methods: One hundred six eyes of 53 patients with bilateral cataract and no other ocular comorbidity were prospectively randomized to receive a hydrophobic acrylic or hydrophilic acrylic single-piece IOL in the first eye to have surgery. The alternate IOL was implanted in the fellow eye 4 to 6 weeks later. All surgery was performed by a single surgeon. Postoperative follow-up was 1 day, 1 and 6 months, and 1 year. At each visit, the best corrected high- and low-contrast visual acuities were assessed and a high-intensity digital retroillumination photograph was taken. Posterior capsule opacification was assessed from the digital images by a single operator using a dedicated software program and calculated as the percentage area of opacified capsule. Results: One year postoperatively, the median percentage area of PCO was 50.3% in the hydrophilic IOL group and 4.9% in the hydrophobic IOL group (P<.001). The difference in PCO was not accounted for by loss of contact between the capsulorhexis and IOL surface. Further analysis showed that lens epithelial cells tended to invade the posterior capsule at the haptic-optic junction. This was more marked in the hydrophilic IOL group. Conclusions: The rate of PCO was significantly higher with the hydrophilic IOL. However, the results cannot be attributed to the IOL material alone as they show the importance of both IOL material and design.</s0>
</fC01>
<fC02 i1="01" i2="X"><s0>002B25B</s0>
</fC02>
<fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Etude comparative</s0>
<s5>02</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Comparative study</s0>
<s5>02</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Estudio comparativo</s0>
<s5>02</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Postérieur</s0>
<s5>03</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Posterior</s0>
<s5>03</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Posterior</s0>
<s5>03</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Capsule</s0>
<s5>05</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Capsule</s0>
<s5>05</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Cápsula</s0>
<s5>05</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Opacification</s0>
<s5>06</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Opacification</s0>
<s5>06</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Opacificación</s0>
<s5>06</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Taux</s0>
<s5>08</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Rate</s0>
<s5>08</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Tasa</s0>
<s5>08</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Hydrophilie</s0>
<s5>09</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Hydrophily</s0>
<s5>09</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Hidrofilia</s0>
<s5>09</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="07" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Lentille intraoculaire</s0>
<s5>11</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="07" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Intraocular lens</s0>
<s5>11</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="07" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Lente intraocular</s0>
<s5>11</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="08" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Chirurgie</s0>
<s5>12</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="08" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Surgery</s0>
<s5>12</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="08" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Cirugía</s0>
<s5>12</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="09" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Ophtalmologie</s0>
<s5>14</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="09" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Ophthalmology</s0>
<s5>14</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="09" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Oftalmología</s0>
<s5>14</s5>
</fC03>
<fN21><s1>199</s1>
</fN21>
<fN44 i1="01"><s1>OTO</s1>
</fN44>
<fN82><s1>OTO</s1>
</fN82>
</pA>
</standard>
</inist>
</record>

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Ticri/CIDE/explor/HapticV1/Data/PascalFrancis/Curation

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000625 | SxmlIndent | more

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PascalFrancis/Curation/biblio.hfd -nk 000625 | SxmlIndent | more

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri

{{Explor lien
   |wiki=    Ticri/CIDE
   |area=    HapticV1
   |flux=    PascalFrancis
   |étape=   Curation
   |type=    RBID
   |clé=     Pascal:05-0285212
   |texte=   Comparison of posterior capsule opacification rates between hydrophilic and hydrophobic single-piece acrylic intraocular lenses
}}

This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.23.
Data generation: Mon Jun 13 01:09:46 2016. Site generation: Wed Mar 6 09:54:07 2024

	Serveur d'exploration sur les dispositifs haptiques
	Attention, ce site est en cours de développement ! Attention, site généré par des moyens informatiques à partir de corpus bruts. Les informations ne sont donc pas validées.

Serveur d'exploration sur les dispositifs haptiques

Comparison of posterior capsule opacification rates between hydrophilic and hydrophobic single-piece acrylic intraocular lenses

Comparison of posterior capsule opacification rates between hydrophilic and hydrophobic single-piece acrylic intraocular lenses

Source :

Descripteurs français

English descriptors

Abstract

Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)

Links to Exploration step

Le document en format XML

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri