Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37058458›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2023

Comparison of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery and conventional phacoemulsification on corneal impact: A meta-analysis and systematic review.

Hanle Wang, Xinyi Chen, Jingjie Xu, Ke Yao

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Advances in cataract surgery: is a new era on the horizon?Current opinion in ophthalmology · 2026
    Review
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hanle WangEye Center of the Second Affiliated Hospital, Medical College of Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Xinyi ChenEye Center of the Second Affiliated Hospital, Medical College of Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Jingjie XuEye Center of the Second Affiliated Hospital, Medical College of Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Ke YaoEye Center of the Second Affiliated Hospital, Medical College of Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0002-6764-7365
Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

CataractCataract ExtractionCorneal InjuriesLaser TherapyPhacoemulsificationHumansLasers

Identifiers

PMID37058458
PMCPMC10104330
OpenAlexW4365482289

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.