FLACS vs phacoemulsification in shallow anterior chambers: systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Shih-Heng Hung, Chiao-Hsin Lan, Ya-Hsin Yao, Ta-Hung Chiu, Da-Wen Lu, Yann-Guang Chen, Wei-Ting Yen
{"title":"FLACS vs phacoemulsification in shallow anterior chambers: systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Shih-Heng Hung, Chiao-Hsin Lan, Ya-Hsin Yao, Ta-Hung Chiu, Da-Wen Lu, Yann-Guang Chen, Wei-Ting Yen","doi":"10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000002062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Topic: </strong>To evaluate the efficacy and safety of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) vs conventional phacoemulsification in eyes with shallow anterior chambers or primary angle-closure disease, with endothelial cell loss (ECL) as the primary outcome (PROSPERO: CRD420251274747).</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Shallow anterior chambers pose unique surgical challenges during phacoemulsification, placing the corneal endothelium at increased risk of damage. This population, disproportionately prevalent in Asia, is expected to grow substantially with aging demographics, underscoring the need for optimized surgical strategies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched through January 2026. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing FLACS with conventional phacoemulsification were included. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled estimates were calculated using random-effects models; certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>6 studies (505 eyes) were analyzed. FLACS was associated with lower ECL (mean difference [MD] -4.97%; 95% CI -8.27 to -1.67; P = .003; I2 = 98%) and cumulative dissipated energy (MD -2.47; 95% CI -3.64 to -1.30; P < .001; I2 = 14% in sensitivity analysis). FLACS was associated with 60% lower odds of early postoperative complications (odds ratio 0.40; 95% CI 0.23-0.68; P < .001; I2 = 0%). Visual outcomes were comparable.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>FLACS was associated with fewer early postoperative complications, supported by moderate-certainty evidence, and with lower ECL and ultrasound energy, although the magnitude of these benefits remains uncertain on low-certainty evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":15214,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000002062","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Topic: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery (FLACS) vs conventional phacoemulsification in eyes with shallow anterior chambers or primary angle-closure disease, with endothelial cell loss (ECL) as the primary outcome (PROSPERO: CRD420251274747).

Clinical relevance: Shallow anterior chambers pose unique surgical challenges during phacoemulsification, placing the corneal endothelium at increased risk of damage. This population, disproportionately prevalent in Asia, is expected to grow substantially with aging demographics, underscoring the need for optimized surgical strategies.

Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched through January 2026. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing FLACS with conventional phacoemulsification were included. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled estimates were calculated using random-effects models; certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework.

Results: 6 studies (505 eyes) were analyzed. FLACS was associated with lower ECL (mean difference [MD] -4.97%; 95% CI -8.27 to -1.67; P = .003; I2 = 98%) and cumulative dissipated energy (MD -2.47; 95% CI -3.64 to -1.30; P < .001; I2 = 14% in sensitivity analysis). FLACS was associated with 60% lower odds of early postoperative complications (odds ratio 0.40; 95% CI 0.23-0.68; P < .001; I2 = 0%). Visual outcomes were comparable.

Conclusions: FLACS was associated with fewer early postoperative complications, supported by moderate-certainty evidence, and with lower ECL and ultrasound energy, although the magnitude of these benefits remains uncertain on low-certainty evidence.

飞秒激光辅助白内障手术与浅前房超声乳化手术:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。
主题:评价飞秒激光辅助白内障手术(FLACS)与传统超声乳化术在以内皮细胞损失(ECL)为主要结局的浅前房或原发性闭角性疾病患者的疗效和安全性。(普洛斯彼罗:[为同行评议蒙面])。临床相关性:在超声乳化术中,浅前房带来了独特的手术挑战,使角膜内皮受损的风险增加。这一人群在亚洲尤为普遍,随着人口老龄化,预计将大幅增长,强调了优化手术策略的必要性。方法:检索至2026年1月的MEDLINE、Embase和Cochrane CENTRAL。随机对照试验和观察性研究比较FLACS与常规超声乳化术。采用Cochrane Risk of bias 2工具和Newcastle-Ottawa量表评估偏倚风险。使用随机效应模型计算汇总估计;使用GRADE框架评估证据的确定性。结果:分析了6项研究(505只眼)。FLACS与较低的ECL(平均差[MD] -4.97%; 95%可信区间[CI]: -8.27至-1.67;P = 0.003; I2 = 98%)和累积耗散能(MD -2.47; 95% CI: -3.64至-1.30;P < 0.001;敏感性分析I2 = 14%)相关。FLACS与术后早期并发症发生率降低60%相关(优势比0.40;95% CI: 0.23 ~ 0.68; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%)。视觉结果具有可比性。结论:FLACS与较少的早期术后并发症相关,有中等确定性的证据支持,内皮细胞损失和超声能量也较低,尽管这些益处的大小在低确定性的证据中仍不确定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
14.30%
发文量
259
审稿时长
8.5 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery (JCRS), a preeminent peer-reviewed monthly ophthalmology publication, is the official journal of the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) and the European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons (ESCRS). JCRS publishes high quality articles on all aspects of anterior segment surgery. In addition to original clinical studies, the journal features a consultation section, practical techniques, important cases, and reviews as well as basic science articles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书