SynthesisPloS one2023
Comparison of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery and conventional phacoemulsification on corneal impact: A meta-analysis and systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery versus conventional phacoemulsification cataract surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety analysis of LenSX and Catalys femtosecond laser systems in short axial length patients.Lasers in medical science · 2026Trial
- Aqueous Proteomic and Metabolomic Profiles in Low-Energy vs High-Energy Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Trial
- Advances in cataract surgery: is a new era on the horizon?Current opinion in ophthalmology · 2026Review
- Fluctuations in intraocular pressure before and after femtosecond laser pretreatment for cataract surgery.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2026Observational
- Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery versus conventional phacoemulsification surgery: visual outcomes with presbyopia-correcting intraocular lens.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Macular pucker and cataract treated with phacoemulsification and IOL implantation combined with small-gauge pars plana vitrectomy: a comparison of outcomes with and without femtosecond laser assistance.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Optimal Timing for Intraocular Pressure Measurement Following Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Review
- Surgical considerations in hyperopic cataract patients: optimizing outcomes and reducing complications.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Factors Associated With Postoperative Outcomes in Femtosecond Laser-Assisted Cataract Surgery.Cureus · 2025Article
- Changes in cataract and refractive surgery practice patterns among JSCRS members over the past 20 years.Japanese journal of ophthalmology · 2024Article
- User Friendliness and Perioperative Guidance Benefits of a Cataract Surgery Education App: Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Comparison of visual performance with iTrace analyzer following femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery with bilateral implantation of two different trifocal intraocular lenses.International journal of ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Excessive corneal endothelial single-cell loss following endothelial injuries.Taiwan journal of ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This meta-analysis aims to compare corneal injuries and function after femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) and conventional phacoemulsification surgery (CPS). A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCT) and high-quality prospective comparative cohort studies comparing FLACS with CPS. Endothelial cell loss percentage (ECL%), central corneal thickness (CCT), endothelial cell density (ECD), endothelial cell loss (ECL), percentage of the hexagonal cell (6A), and coefficient of variance (CoV) were used as an indicator of corneal injury and function. Totally 42 trials (23 RCTs and 19 prospective cohort studies), including 3916 eyes, underwent FLACS, and a total of 3736 eyes underwent CPS. ECL% is significantly lower in the FLACS group at 1-3 days (P = 0.005), 1 week (P = 0.004), 1 month (P<0.0001), 3 months (P = 0.001), and 6 months (P = 0.004) after surgery compared to CPS. ECD and ECL appeared no statistically significant difference between the two groups, except for the significant reduction of ECD at 3 months in the CPS group (P = 0.002). CCT was significantly lower in the FLACS group at 1 week (P = 0.05) and 1 month (P = 0.002) early postoperatively. While at 1-3 days (P = 0.50), 3 months (P = 0.18), and 6 months (P = 0.11), there was no difference between the FLACS group and the CPS group. No significant difference was found in the percentage of hexagonal cells and the coefficient of variance. FLACS, compared with CPS, reduces corneal injury in the early postoperative period. Corneal edema recovered faster in the FLACS group in the early postoperative period. In addition, FLACS may be a better option for patients with corneal dysfunction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.