Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Intra and post-operative complications observed with femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery versus conventional phacoemulsification surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Intra and post-operative complications observed with femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery versus conventional phacoemulsification surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Do you wish to request the book?
Intra and post-operative complications observed with femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery versus conventional phacoemulsification surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Intra and post-operative complications observed with femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery versus conventional phacoemulsification surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis
2019
Overview
Background
In this analysis, we aimed to systematically compare the complications which were associated with femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) versus the conventional phacoemulsification surgery (CPE).
Methods
Commonly used search databases, specifically MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, EMBASE, and
http://www.clinicaltrials.gov
were carefully searched for English publications comparing FLACS versus CPE. The selected endpoints which were assessed included incomplete capsulotomy, anterior capsulotomy tag, anterior capsule tear, posterior capsule tear, injury to the descemet’s membrane, zonular dialysis, vitreous loss, macular or corneal edema, and elevated intra-ocular pressure. Statistical analysis was carried out by the latest version of the RevMan software (version 5.3) and represented by risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
Results
A total number of 7156 participants were included. Three thousand five hundred and fifty four (3554) participants were assigned to the FLACS group. The risks for incomplete capsulotomy, anterior capsulotomy tag, and anterior capsular tear were significantly higher with FLACS (RR: 22.42, 95% CI: 4.53–110.82;
P
= 0.0001), (RR: 33.07, 95% CI: 6.53–167.56; P = 0.0001) and (RR: 4.74, 95% CI: 2.59–8.68;
P
= 0.00001) respectively. The risks for macular/corneal edema (RR: 2.05, 95% CI: 1.18–3.55;
P
= 0.01) and elevated intra-ocular pressure (RR: 3.24, 95% CI: 1.55–6.78;
P
= 0.002) were also significantly higher with FLACS. However, the risks for impaired descemet’s membrane (RR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.61–1.47;
P
= 0.80), zonular dialysis (RR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.06–2.72;
P
= 0.35), vitreous loss (RR: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.01–1.63;
P
= 0.10) and posterior capsular tear (RR: 1.45, 95% CI: 0.23–9.16;
P
= 0.69) were not significantly different.
Conclusions
The current results showed that FLACS did not improve intra/post-operative complications in comparison to CPE. Further larger studies should confirm this hypothesis.
Publisher
BioMed Central,BioMed Central Ltd,BMC
