-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2023Acute primary angle closure (APAC) is a potentially blinding condition. It is one of the few ophthalmic emergencies and carries high rates of visual morbidity in the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Acute primary angle closure (APAC) is a potentially blinding condition. It is one of the few ophthalmic emergencies and carries high rates of visual morbidity in the absence of timely intervention. Laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI) has been the standard of care thus far. However, LPI does not eliminate the long-term risk of chronic angle closure glaucoma and other associated sequelae. There has been increasing interest in lens extraction as the primary treatment for the spectrum of primary angle closure disease, and it is as yet unclear whether these results can be extrapolated to APAC, and whether lens extraction provides better long-term outcomes. We therefore sought to evaluate the effectiveness of lens extraction in APAC to help inform the decision-making process. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of lens extraction compared to LPI in the treatment of APAC.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2022, Issue 1), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE E-pub Ahead of Print, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily (January 1946 to 10 January 2022), Embase (January 1947 to 10 January 2022), PubMed (1946 to 10 January 2022), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS) (1982 to 10 January 2022), ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic search. We last searched the electronic databases on 10 January 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled clinical trials comparing lens extraction against LPI in adult participants ( ≥ 35 years) with APAC in one or both eyes.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodology and assessed the certainty of the body of evidence for prespecified outcomes using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included two studies conducted in Hong Kong and Singapore, comprising 99 eyes (99 participants) of predominantly Chinese origin. The two studies compared LPI with phacoemulsification performed by experienced surgeons. We assessed that both studies were at high risk of bias. There were no studies evaluating other types of lens extraction procedures. Phacoemulsification may result in an increased proportion of participants with intraocular pressure (IOP) control compared with LPI at 18 to 24 months (risk ratio (RR) 1.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.28 to 2.15; 2 studies, n = 97; low certainty evidence) and may reduce the need for further IOP-lowering surgery within 24 months (RR 0.07, 96% CI 0.01 to 0.51; 2 studies, n = 99; very low certainty evidence). Phacoemulsification may result in a lower mean IOP at 12 months compared to LPI (mean difference (MD) -3.20, 95% CI -4.79 to -1.61; 1 study, n = 62; low certainty evidence) and a slightly lower mean number of IOP-lowering medications at 18 months (MD -0.87, 95% CI -1.28 to -0.46; 1 study, n = 60; low certainty evidence), but this may not be clinically significant. Phacoemulsification may have little to no effect on the proportion of participants with one or more recurrent APAC episodes in the same eye (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.30; 1 study, n = 37; very low certainty evidence). Phacoemulsification may result in a wider iridocorneal angle assessed by Shaffer grading at six months (MD 1.15, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.47; 1 study, n = 62; very low certainty evidence). Phacoemulsification may have little to no effect on logMAR best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at six months (MD -0.09, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.02; 2 studies, n = 94; very low certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a difference in the extent of peripheral anterior synechiae (PAS) (clock hours) between intervention arms at 6 months (MD -1.86, 95% CI -7.03 to 3.32; 2 studies, n = 94; very low certainty evidence), although the phacoemulsification group may have less PAS (degrees) at 12 months (MD -94.20, 95% CI -140.37 to -48.03; 1 study, n = 62) and 18 months (MD -127.30, 95% CI -168.91 to -85.69; 1 study, n = 60). In one study, there were 26 adverse events in the phacoemulsification group: intraoperative corneal edema (n = 12), posterior capsular rupture (n = 1), intraoperative bleeding from iris root (n = 1), postoperative fibrinous anterior chamber reaction (n = 7), and visually significant posterior capsular opacification (n = 5), and no cases of suprachoroidal hemorrhage or endophthalmitis. There were four adverse events in the LPI group: closed iridotomy (n = 1) and small iridotomies that required supplementary laser (n = 3). In the other study, there was one adverse event in the phacoemulsification group (IOP > 30 mmHg on day 1 postoperatively (n = 1)), and no intraoperative complications. There were five adverse events in the LPI group: transient hemorrhage (n = 1), corneal burn (n = 1), and repeated LPI because of non-patency (n = 3). Neither study reported health- or vision-related quality of life measures.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low certainty evidence suggests that early lens extraction may produce more favorable outcomes compared to initial LPI in terms of IOP control. Evidence for other outcomes is less clear. Future high-quality and longer-term studies evaluating the effects of either intervention on the development of glaucomatous damage and visual field changes as well as health-related quality of life measures would be helpful.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Cataract Extraction; Glaucoma; Intraocular Pressure; Phacoemulsification; Quality of Life
PubMed: 36884304
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015116.pub2 -
American Journal of Ophthalmology Jul 2023To compare the extended depth of focus (EDOF) vs trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) in patients undergoing IOL implantation. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To compare the extended depth of focus (EDOF) vs trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) in patients undergoing IOL implantation.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
An electronic search was conducted as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to include studies comparing EDOF vs trifocal IOLs. Refraction and visual acuity were primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included defocus curves, intraocular aberrations, contrast sensitivity (CS), quality of vision (QoV) questionnaire score, haloes and glare, spectacle independence, and patient satisfaction.
RESULTS
A total of 22 studies enrolling 2200 eyes were identified. Trifocal IOL showed a significant improvement in sphere (mean difference [MD] = -0.23; P = .001) and spherical equivalence (MD = -0.11, P = .0001) compared to EDOF IOL. No difference was observed in cylinder (MD = -0.03, P = .25) or astigmatism. Trifocal IOL had superior near visual acuity outcomes, namely uncorrected near visual acuity (MD = 0.12, P < .00001) and distance-corrected near visual acuity (MD = 0.12, P = .002). Postoperative corrected distance visual acuity (MD = -0.01, P = .01) was significantly improved for the EDOF group, although no difference was noted in postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity (MD = 0.00, P = .84), uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (MD = 0.01, P = .68) or distance-corrected intermediate visual acuity (MD = -0.01, P = .39). Defocus curve favored trifocal IOLs at near vision and EDOF IOLs at intermediate vision. Ocular aberration, CS, haloes (odds ratio = 0.64, P = .10), glare, and patient satisfaction were not statistically significant between the groups. The trifocal IOL was associated with an improved QoV questionnaire score (MD = 1.24, P = 0.03) and spectacle independence (odds ratio = 0.26, P = .02).
CONCLUSIONS
Trifocal IOLs improved uncorrected near visual acuity compared to EDOF IOLs. Uncorrected distance and intermediate visual acuity, halos, and glare were not statistically different between both groups.
Topics: Humans; Lens Implantation, Intraocular; Lenses, Intraocular; Visual Acuity; Refraction, Ocular; Cataract Extraction; Patient Satisfaction; Prosthesis Design; Phacoemulsification; Pseudophakia
PubMed: 36736751
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2023.01.024 -
Seminars in Ophthalmology Jul 2023To evaluate whether using prostaglandin analogues (PGAs) perioperatively is associated with an increased rate of the development of clinical or subclinical cystoid... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To evaluate whether using prostaglandin analogues (PGAs) perioperatively is associated with an increased rate of the development of clinical or subclinical cystoid macular edema (CME) after uneventful cataract surgery.
METHODS
The PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect databases were searched to June 2022 for this systematic review and meta-analysis. Two authors independently screened search results. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to calculate the overall incidence rate and odds ratio (OR). Quality of studies was assessed using the modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The incidences of CME for continued discontinued use of PGAs perioperatively, continued use of PGAs, discontinued use of PGAs, and PGA users non-PGA antiglaucomatous users were main outcomes.
RESULTS
Out of 544-articles, 9 studies that met the inclusion criteria were analyzed. The continued use of PGAs was not associated with an increased risk of the development of subclinical macular edema compared with discontinued use (OR = 1.32 [95% Confidence Interval (CI) = 0.49-3.51], .582). The overall incidence of CME was 34% (95% CI = 0.17-0.52) for continued use of PGAs and 7% (95% CI = 0.02-0.13) for discontinued use of PGAs. Using PGAs did not increase the risk of CME's development compared with non-PGA antiglaucomatous usage (OR = 2.29 [95% CI = 0.84-6.23], .103).
CONCLUSIONS
Discontinuing treatment with PGAs during the perioperative period in eyes without any known risk factors for CME has no clinically significant effect on reducing the development of postoperative CME based on the existing studies. Further, well-designed randomized controlled trials need to be performed.
Topics: Humans; Macular Edema; Cataract Extraction; Prostaglandins, Synthetic; Ophthalmology; Cataract; Postoperative Complications; Phacoemulsification
PubMed: 36703301
DOI: 10.1080/08820538.2023.2170716 -
Clinical Ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) 2023Selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) and minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) are increasingly used options for mild-to-moderate open-angle glaucoma (OAG) care.... (Review)
Review
Systematic Literature Review of Clinical, Economic, and Humanistic Outcomes Following Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgery or Selective Laser Trabeculoplasty for the Treatment of Open-Angle Glaucoma with or Without Cataract Extraction.
INTRODUCTION
Selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT) and minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) are increasingly used options for mild-to-moderate open-angle glaucoma (OAG) care. While most MIGS devices are indicated for use in combination with cataract surgery only, with phacoemulsification playing a role in lowering IOP, newer technologies can also be used as standalone glaucoma surgery.
METHODS
This systematic literature review (SLR) aimed to assess the clinical, economic, and humanistic outcomes of MIGS and SLT for the treatment of OAG and was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies that assessed MIGS or SLT in at least one treatment arm versus any other glaucoma treatment in adults with mild-to-moderate OAG were included. Clinical, humanistic (health-related quality of life [HRQoL] and patient burden), and economic data were extracted, and the methodological quality of included studies was evaluated.
RESULTS
A total of 2720 articles were screened, and 81 publications were included. Fifty-eight reported clinical outcomes. The majority assessed iStent or iStent inject (n=41), followed by OMNI (n=9), gonioscopy-assisted transluminal trabeculotomy (GATT) or the Kahook Dual Blade (KDB) (n=7), Hydrus (n=6), SLT (n=5), Xen Gel Stent (n=2), PreserFlo (n=1), and iTrack (n=1). IOP reduction was observed across prospective studies, varying from -31% to -13.7% at month 6 and from -39% to -11.4% at year 1 versus baseline. Most adverse events were transient and non-serious. Limited humanistic and economic data were identified.
CONCLUSION
Given their established efficacy and safety, there is a rationale for wider use of MIGS in mild-to-moderate OAG. Of the MIGS devices, iStent and OMNI have the largest clinical evidence base supporting their sustained effectiveness.
PubMed: 36636619
DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S389406 -
Ophthalmology and Therapy Apr 2023Currently, there is no generally approved surgical treatment for patients with primary angle-closure glaucoma (PACG) and co-existing cataracts. The aim of this... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Currently, there is no generally approved surgical treatment for patients with primary angle-closure glaucoma (PACG) and co-existing cataracts. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of phacoemulsification and phacotrabeculectomy in PACG patients with cataract.
METHODS
Diverse databases were searched, including PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Chinese Journal Full-text Database (CNKI), Wanfang database, and China Science and Technology Journal Database, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on phacoemulsification and phacotrabeculectomy for the treatment of PACG published up to 30 June 2021. ReviewManager (RevMan) version 5.4 software was used for the meta-analysis, and the effective quantity of measurement data was measured by the mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). The effect of counting data was measured by odds ratio (OR).
RESULTS
Our search of the databases identified 14 RCTs that satisfied the search criteria. Meta-analysis of these 14 RCTs showed that at the 1 month postoperative follow-up, intraocular pressure (IOP) of patients in the phacoemulsification group was higher than that of patients in the phacotrabeculectomy group (MD 2.04, 95% CI 1.42-2.65; P < 0.00001). However, the postoperative IOP was not significantly different between the two groups at the 3, 6, and 12 months postoperative follow-ups (P = 0.52, P = 0.51, and P = 0.05, respectively). More medications for IOP reduction were required by patients in the phacoemulsification group compared with those in the phacotrabeculectomy group at 3 months postoperation (MD 0.76, 95% CI 0.33-1.18; P = 0.0005), 6 months postoperation (MD 0.66, 95% CI 0.15-1.18; P = 0.01), and 12 months postoperation (MD 0.76, 95% CI 0.22-1.30; P = 0.006). Patients in the phacoemulsification group obtained better best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) than those in the phacotrabeculectomy group (MD - 0.17, 95% CI - 0.34 to - 0.01; P = 0.04) at 3 months postoperation, but there was no significant difference in BCVA between the two groups at 6 and 12 months postoperation (P = 0.33 and P = 0.56, respectively). The deepened anterior chamber was more obvious in patients in the phacoemulsification group versus those in the phacotrabeculectomy group (MD 0.61, 95% CI 0.03-1.18; P = 0.04). Patients in the phacoemulsification group experienced fewer postoperative complications than those in the phacotrabeculectomy group (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.17-0.42; P < 0.00001).
CONCLUSION
Our results provide evidence that phacotrabeculectomy has advantages over phacoemulsification for the treatment of PACG in terms of better IOP and reduced medication need during the early stage post surgery. However, in terms of the complication risk, phacoemulsification is the more secure treatment option.
PubMed: 36580218
DOI: 10.1007/s40123-022-00639-z -
Graefe's Archive For Clinical and... May 2023Cataract and glaucoma are two of the most common ocular comorbidities. Cataract surgery has been shown to influence intra-ocular pressure (IOP) in patients with... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Cataract and glaucoma are two of the most common ocular comorbidities. Cataract surgery has been shown to influence intra-ocular pressure (IOP) in patients with glaucoma; nevertheless, the extent of this effect remains controversial, especially in patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG). The aim of this review is to determine the real effect of cataract surgery on IOP change in patients with OAG, focusing on data retrieved from randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
METHODS
A systematic review was performed, including six different RCTs that studied the net effect of cataract surgery on IOP. Eligibility criteria required a full washout from hypotensive therapy, allowing accurate measurement of unmedicated IOP, both before and after surgery.
RESULTS
Included studies revealed a consistent reduction on IOP occurring after surgery, varying between 4.1 and 8.5 mmHg depending on the RCT. There was also a decrease in the number of glaucoma medications, with a mean reduction of 0.2-1.0 agents postoperatively. Evaluation of adverse outcomes of cataract surgery showed a very favourable safety profile.
CONCLUSION
Although the role of cataract surgery in the algorithm of glaucoma treatment remains to be established, this review highlights a consistent decrease on IOP following surgery and a reduced dependency on glaucoma medications. Potential downgrade in medication can thus be considered in well-controlled glaucoma patients after phacoemulsification. PROSPERO registry: CRD42022343378.
Topics: Humans; Cataract Extraction; Intraocular Pressure; Tonometry, Ocular; Glaucoma; Phacoemulsification; Cataract; Glaucoma, Open-Angle
PubMed: 36441227
DOI: 10.1007/s00417-022-05911-3 -
Indian Journal of Ophthalmology Nov 2022Cataract extraction is one of the most common surgical procedures performed worldwide. Manual small-incision cataract surgery (MSICS) is a popular technique of cataract... (Review)
Review
Cataract extraction is one of the most common surgical procedures performed worldwide. Manual small-incision cataract surgery (MSICS) is a popular technique of cataract extraction. Full economic evaluation of different techniques is of value to policy makers. This was a systematic review of published literature to present a brief overview of evidence available in respect of economic evaluation measures like cost effectiveness, cost utility, and cost parameters in cataract patients regarding MSICS. The data on these was sparse and heterogeneous. Direct costs of MSICS were lower than phacoemulsification (PE): $25.55 (PE) to $17.03 (MSICS) in India, $15 (MSICS) to $70 (PE) in Nepal, and $62.25 (MSICS) to $104.15 (PE) in Thailand. The cost utility analysis for MSICS demonstrated savings of $79.57 (INR6175) per gain in LogMAR BCVA, $8.91 (INR691) per QALY gained and $1.42 (INR110) per VF 14 score increment in India. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) $368.20 (13,215.50 Baht) for MSICS was better than $489.30 (17,561.70 Baht) for PE in Thailand. ICER for femto laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) compared to was €10,703 in femtosecond laser-assisted versus phacoemulsification cataract surgery (FEMCAT) study. The corrected ICER for PE against MSICS is €146.50. The limited data available demonstrates that MSICS is the most cost-effective technique among FLACS, PE, and MSICS. MSICS scores over other existing alternatives of cataract extraction from cost-effectiveness and cost-minimization approaches. Further research is required in this area.
Topics: Humans; Cataract Extraction; Phacoemulsification; Cataract; Lens Implantation, Intraocular; Ophthalmology
PubMed: 36308093
DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_1266_22 -
Graefe's Archive For Clinical and... Mar 2023Cataract surgery in patients with uveitis is challenging, and postoperative inflammation control is crucial for successful outcomes. No consensus exists regarding the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Cataract surgery in patients with uveitis is challenging, and postoperative inflammation control is crucial for successful outcomes. No consensus exists regarding the optimal method of controlling postoperative inflammation. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we compared the outcome of intravitreal injection (IVI), including steroid (triamcinolone acetonide) or steroid implant (dexamethasone), with systemic anti-inflammatory therapy (ST), such as systemic steroids with or without immunomodulatory therapy, in patients with uveitis undergoing cataract surgery.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), comparative cohort studies, and case-control studies published through May 2021 that compared intraoperative IVI of triamcinolone acetonide or steroid implant with ST with or without immunomodulatory therapy. The following outcomes were evaluated: preoperative best-corrected visual acuity, intraocular pressure, laser flare photometry, central macular thickness and cystoid macular edema rate.
RESULTS
Five studies were selected. Our analysis indicated that compared with ST, IVI treatment may be associated with less anterior chamber inflammation and a lower cystoid macular edema rate, but the difference in best-corrected visual acuity, intraocular pressure, or central macular thickness was not significant.
CONCLUSIONS
IVI of steroid or steroid implants might be beneficial in controlling postoperative inflammation for uveitis cataract, especially in patients who cannot tolerate ST. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of intraoperative IVI of steroids with standard-of-care treatment as a prophylaxis for uveitis cataract. However, large-scale RCTs are warranted to compare the IVI of steroid implants and steroids.
Topics: Humans; Triamcinolone Acetonide; Intravitreal Injections; Macular Edema; Phacoemulsification; Uveitis; Glucocorticoids; Inflammation; Cataract; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36271933
DOI: 10.1007/s00417-022-05852-x -
Frontiers in Medicine 2022Phacoemulsification is an effective and widely performed technique in cataract surgery, but the comparative anatomical outcomes, including endothelial cell loss (ECL),...
BACKGROUND
Phacoemulsification is an effective and widely performed technique in cataract surgery, but the comparative anatomical outcomes, including endothelial cell loss (ECL), central corneal thickness (CCT), and central macular thickness (CMT), between high-flow and low-flow phacoemulsification cataract surgery remain unclear.
METHODS
This study followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement. Random-effects models were applied to measure pooled mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) of anatomical outcomes between high-flow and low-flow phacoemulsification cataract surgery. We judged overall certainty of evidence (CoE) based on Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria.
RESULTS
We included six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) totaling 477 participants. The meta-analysis showed similar changes associated with these two surgery types in both ECL at postoperative days 2-14 (MD: -1.63%; 95% CI: -3.73 to 0.47%; CoE: very low), days 15-42 (MD: -0.65%; 95% CI -2.96 to 1.65%; CoE: very low) and day 43 to month 18 (MD: -0.35%; 95% CI: -1.48 to 0.78%; CoE: very low), and CCT at postoperative day 1 (MD: -16.37 μm; 95% CI: -56.91 to 24.17 μm; CoE: very low), days 2-14 (MD: -10.92 μm; 95% CI: -30.00 to 8.16 μm; CoE: very low) and days 15-42 (MD: -2.76 μm; 95% CI: -5.75 to 0.24 μm; CoE: low). By contrast, low-flow phacoemulsification showed less increase in CMT at postoperative days 15-42 (MD, -4.58 μm; 95% CI: -6.3 to -2.86 μm; CoE: low).
CONCLUSIONS
We found similar anatomical outcomes, except in CMT, for both high-flow and low-flow phacoemulsification cataract surgery. Future head-to-head RCTs on visual outcomes should confirm our findings.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO, identifier: CRD42022297036.
PubMed: 36250089
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.1021941 -
PloS One 2022For primary angle-closure and angle-closure glaucoma, the fact that refractive error sometimes deviates from predictions after intraocular lens (IOL) implantation is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
For primary angle-closure and angle-closure glaucoma, the fact that refractive error sometimes deviates from predictions after intraocular lens (IOL) implantation is familiar to cataract surgeons. Since controversy remains in the accuracy of IOL power calculation formulas, both traditional and network meta-analysis on formula accuracy were conducted in patients with primary angle-closure conditions.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was conducted through Aug 2022, focusing on studies on intraocular lens power calculation in primary angle-closure (PAC) and primary angle-closure glaucoma (PACG). A systemic review and network meta-analysis was performed. Quality of studies were assessed. Primary outcomes were the mean absolute errors (MAE) and the percentages of eyes with a prediction error within ±0.50 diopiters (D) or ±1.00 D (% ±0.50/1.00 D) by different formulas.
RESULTS
Six retrospective studies involving 419 eyes and 8 formulas (Barrett Universal II, Kane, SRK/T, Hoffer Q, Haigis, Holladay I, RBF 3.0 and LSF) were included. SRK/T was used as a reference as it had been investigated in all the studies included. Direct comparison showed that none of the involved formula outperformed or was defeated by SRK/T significantly in terms of either MAE or % ±0.50/1.00 D (all P>0.05). Network comparison and ranking possibilities disclosed BUII, Kane, RBF 3.0 with statistically insignificant advantage. No significant publication bias was detected by network funnel plot.
CONCLUSIONS
No absolute advantage was disclosed among the formulas involved in this study for PAC/PACG eyes. Further carefully designed studies are warranted to evaluate IOL calculation formulae in this target population.
TRAIL REGISTRATION
Registration: PROSEPRO ID: CRD42022326541.
Topics: Biometry; Glaucoma, Angle-Closure; Humans; Lenses, Intraocular; Network Meta-Analysis; Optics and Photonics; Phacoemulsification; Refraction, Ocular; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 36240196
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0276286