Manual small incision cataract surgery (MSICS) with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age-related cataract

Factors Influencing Visual Improvement after Phacoemulsification Surgery among Malaysian Cataract Patients

Blindness and visual impairment are part of the global burden of eye disease, with cataract being one of the leading causes of blindness. This study aimed to determine the factors affecting visual acuity (VA) improvement among cataract patients after phacoemulsification surgery in Malaysia. Cataract patients aged over 18 who underwent phacoemulsification surgery between January 2014 and December 2018 were included in this retrospective cohort study. Patients' sociodemographic, comorbidities, surgical, and related complication factors were extracted from the National Eye Database. The outcome was measured by the difference in visual acuity before and after the operation and was categorized as "improved", "no change", and "worse". A total of 180,776 patients were included in the final analysis. Multinomial logistic regression analysis showed "no changes in VA" was significantly higher in patients aged less than 40 years old (OR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.22, 2.26), patients with ocular comorbidities (OR: 1.65; 95% CI: 1.53, 1.77), patients who had undergone surgery lasting more than 60 min (OR: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.14, 1.69), patients who had surgery without an intraocular lens (IOL) (OR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.20, 2.26), and patients with postoperative complications (OR: 8.76; 95% CI: 8.13, 9.45). Worsening VA was significantly higher among male patients (OR: 1.11; 95% CI: 1.01, 1.22), patients who had ocular comorbidities (OR: 1.76; 95% CI: 1.59, 1.96), patients who had undergone surgery lasting more than 60 min (OR: 1.94; 95% CI: 1.57, 2.41), patients who had surgery without an IOL (OR: 2.03; 95% CI: 1.48, 2.80), and patients with postoperative complications (OR: 21.46; 95% CI: 19.35, 23.80). The factors impacting "no changes" in and "worsening" of VA after cataract surgery were the following: older age, male gender, ethnicity, ocular comorbidities, surgeon grade, absence of IOL, intraoperative complication, and postoperative problems.

Intraocular lens optic edge design for the prevention of posterior capsule opacification after cataract surgery

BACKGROUND

Posterior capsule opacification (PCO) is a clouding of the posterior part of the lens capsule, a skin-like transparent structure, which surrounds the crystalline lens in the human eye. PCO is the most common postoperative complication following modern cataract surgery with implantation of a posterior chamber intraocular lens (IOL). The main symptoms of PCO are a decrease in visual acuity, 'cloudy', blurred vision and reduced contrast sensitivity. PCO is treated with a neodymium:YAG (Nd:YAG) laser to create a small opening in the opaque capsule and regain a clear central visual axis. This capsulotomy might cause further ocular complications, such as raised intraocular pressure or swelling of the central retina (macular oedema). This procedure is also a significant financial burden for health care systems worldwide. In recent decades, there have been advances in the selection of IOL materials and optimisation of IOL designs to help prevent PCO formation after cataract surgery. These include changes to the side structures holding the lens in the centre of the lens capsule bag, called IOL haptics, and IOL optic edge designs.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of different IOL optic edge designs on PCO after cataract surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS), the ISRCTN registry, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) up to 17 November 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared different types of IOL optic edge design. Our prespecified primary outcome was the proportion of eyes with Nd:YAG capsulotomy one year after surgery. Secondary outcomes included PCO score, best-corrected distance visual acuity (BCDVA) and quality of life score at one year. Due to availability of important long-term data, we also presented data at longer-term follow-up which is a post hoc change to our protocol.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methods expected by Cochrane and the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 studies (1065 people, 1834 eyes) that compared sharp- and round-edged IOLs. Eight of these studies were within-person studies whereby one eye received a sharp-edged IOL and the fellow eye a round-edged IOL. The IOL materials were acrylic (2 studies), silicone (4 studies), polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA, 3 studies) and different materials (1 study). The studies were conducted in Austria, Germany, India, Japan, Sweden and the UK. Five studies were at high risk of bias in at least one domain. We judged two studies to be at low risk of bias in all domains. There were few cases of Nd:YAG capsulotomy at one year (primary outcome): 1/371 in sharp-edged and 4/371 in round-edged groups. The effect estimate was in favour of sharp-edged IOLs but the confidence intervals were very wide and compatible with higher or lower chance of Nd:YAG capsulotomy in sharp-edged compared with round-edged lenses (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.30, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.74; I² = 0%; 6 studies, 742 eyes). This corresponds to seven fewer cases of Nd:YAG capsulotomy per 1000 sharp-edged IOLs inserted compared with round-edged IOLs (95% CI 9 fewer to 7 more). We judged this as low-certainty evidence, downgrading for imprecision and risk of bias. A similar reduced risk of Nd:YAG capsulotomy in sharp-edge compared with round-edge IOLs was seen at two, three and five years but as the number of Nd:YAG capsulotomy events increased with longer follow-up this effect was more precisely measured at longer follow-up: two years, risk ratio (RR) 0.35 (0.16 to 0.80); 703 eyes (6 studies); 89 fewer cases per 1000; three years, RR 0.21 (0.11 to 0.41); 538 eyes (6 studies); 170 fewer cases per 1000; five years, RR 0.21 (0.10 to 0.45); 306 eyes (4 studies); 331 fewer cases per 1000. Data at 9 years and 12 years were only available from one study. All studies reported a PCO score. Four studies reported the AQUA (Automated Quantification of After-Cataract) score, four studies reported the EPCO (Evaluation of PCO) score and two studies reported another method of quantifying PCO. It was not possible to pool these data due to the way they were reported, but all studies consistently reported a statistically significant lower average PCO score (of the order of 0.5 to 3 units) with sharp-edged IOLs compared with round-edged IOLs. We judged this to be moderate-certainty evidence downgrading for risk of bias. The logMAR visual acuity score was lower (better) in eyes that received a sharp-edged IOL but the difference was small and likely to be clinically unimportant at one year (mean difference (MD) -0.06 logMAR, 95% CI -0.12 to 0; 2 studies, 153 eyes; low-certainty evidence). Similar effects were seen at longer follow-up periods but non-statistically significant data were less fully reported: two years MD -0.01 logMAR (-0.05 to 0.02); 2 studies, 311 eyes; three years MD -0.09 logMAR (-0.22 to 0.03); 2 studies, 117 eyes; data at five years only available from one study. None of the studies reported quality of life. Very low-certainty evidence on adverse events did not suggest any important differences between the groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review provides evidence that sharp-edged IOLs are likely to be associated with less PCO formation than round-edged IOLs, with less Nd:YAG capsulotomy. The effects on visual acuity were less certain. The impact of these lenses on quality of life has not been assessed and there are only very low-certainty comparative data on adverse events.

Modified manual small incision cataract surgery technique for phacoemulsification-trained surgeons

Purpose:

To present the technique and outcomes of a modified manual small incision cataract surgery designed for the phacoemulsification surgeons who are learning to perform manual small incision cataract surgery.

Methods:

This was a retrospective, single-centred, comparative study. We included all the patients who underwent the modified manual small incision cataract surgery for visually significant cataract at Singapore National Eye Centre. All surgeries were performed by either a senior phaco-trained surgeon (M.A.) who had performed more than 500 manual small incision cataract surgery or a junior phaco-trained surgeon (D.C.) who had performed around 500 phacoemulsification but never performed any manual small incision cataract surgery. The main modification of this technique lies in the creation of an additional phaco-like main wound at 90° to the scleral tunnel wound, with most surgical steps performed through this additional wound. The outcomes were analysed and compared between the senior and junior surgeons. The main outcome measures were visual outcome and major intraoperative complications such as posterior capsular rupture and zonular dialysis.

Results:

A total of 132 cases were included; 102 (77.3%) and 30 (22.7%) cases were performed by the senior and junior surgeons, respectively. Pre-operatively, 85.6% eyes had best-corrected visual acuity of counting fingers or worse. Postoperatively, the visual outcome at 1 month was similar between the senior and junior surgeons, with 68.7% eyes achieving a best-corrected visual acuity of ⩾6/12 (p = 0.17). No posterior capsular rupture, zonular dialysis or endophthalmitis was observed during the study period.

Conclusions:

This modified technique may serve as a useful transition technique for the phaco-trained surgeons to develop skills in manual small incision cataract surgery, with demonstrable good visual outcome and safety.

Generic and vision related quality of life associated with different types of cataract surgeries and different types of intraocular lens implantation

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different types of cataract surgeries and intraocular lenses on generic as well as vision related quality of life of cataract patients, using EQ-5D and IND-VFQ 33 instruments respectively.

METHODS

An observational, longitudinal study of patients undergoing cataract surgery was carried out at three ophthalmology centres. Patients were prospectively admitted for surgery for age-related cataract. Generic quality of life was assessed by using Euroqol's EQ5D-5L questionnaire and vision related quality of life was assessed by the IND-VFQ-33 questionnaire. Data pertaining to vision function and quality of life were collected pre surgery and 4 weeks after the surgery.

RESULTS

Out of total patients (n = 814) recruited for the study, 517 patients were interviewed for both pre-surgery and post-surgery for EQ5D and 519 patients were interviewed for both pre-surgery and post-surgery for IND VFQ 33 tool. The combined data from all three centres showed that Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) gains observed in patients undergoing phacoemulsification with foldable lens implantation (2.25 QALY) were significantly higher (0.57 QALY) as compared to Small Incision Cataract Surgery (SICS) with PMMA lens implantation (1.68 QALY). Highest improvement however, in all three subscales of IND-VFQ-33 tool were clearly observed for SICS with PMMA lens implantation.

CONCLUSIONS

The study has elicited the Health related and vision related Quality of Life scores for cataract surgeries and subsequent lens implantation. This study also offers Health State Utility Values along with visual outcomes for different surgical procedures, lenses and for the combination of surgery with lens implantation for cataract procedures providing a useful resource for future economic evaluation studies.

Interventions to improve the quality of cataract services: protocol for a global scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Cataract is the leading cause of blindness globally and a major cause of vision impairment. Cataract surgery is an efficacious intervention that usually restores vision. Although it is one of the most commonly conducted surgical interventions worldwide, good quality services (from being detected with operable cataract to undergoing surgery and receiving postoperative care) are not universally accessible. Poor quality understandably reduces the willingness of people with operable cataract to undergo surgery. Therefore, it is critical to improve the quality of care to subsequently reduce vision loss from cataract. This scoping review aims to summarise the nature and extent of the published literature on interventions to improve the quality of services for primary age-related cataract globally.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search MEDLINE, Embase and Global Health for peer-reviewed manuscripts published since 1990, with no language, geographic or study design restrictions. To define quality, we have used the elements adopted by the WHO-effectiveness, safety, people-centredness, timeliness, equity, integration and efficiency-to which we have added the element of planetary health. We will exclude studies focused on the technical aspects of the surgical procedure and studies that only involve children (<18 years). Two reviewers will screen all titles/abstracts independently, followed by a full-text review of potentially relevant articles. For included articles, data regarding publication characteristics, study details and quality-related outcomes will be extracted by two reviewers independently. Results will be synthesised narratively and presented visually using a spider chart.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was not sought, as our review will only include published and publicly accessible information. We will publish our findings in an open-access peer-reviewed journal and develop an accessible summary of the results for website posting. A summary of the results will be included in the ongoing Lancet Global Health Commission on Global Eye Health.

REGISTRATION DETAILS

Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/8gktz).

Identification and Description of Reliable Evidence for 2016 American Academy of Ophthalmology Preferred Practice Pattern Guidelines for Cataract in the Adult Eye

Importance

Trustworthy clinical practice guidelines require reliable systematic reviews of the evidence to support recommendations. Since 2016, the American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) has partnered with Cochrane Eyes and Vision US Satellite to update their guidelines, the Preferred Practice Patterns (PPP).

Objective

To describe experiences and findings related to identifying reliable systematic reviews that support topics likely to be addressed in the 2016 update of the 2011 AAO PPP guidelines on cataract in the adult eye.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Cross-sectional study. Systematic reviews on the management of cataract were searched for in an established database. Each relevant systematic review was mapped to 1 or more of the 24 management categories listed under the Management section of the table of contents of the 2011 AAO PPP guidelines. Data were extracted to determine the reliability of each systematic review using prespecified criteria, and the reliable systematic reviews were examined to find whether they were referenced in the 2016 AAO PPP guidelines. For comparison, we assessed whether the reliable systematic reviews published before February 2010 the last search date of the 2011 AAO PPP guidelines were referenced in the 2011 AAO PPP guidelines. Cochrane Eyes and Vision US Satellite did not provide systematic reviews to the AAO during the development of the 2011 AAO PPP guidelines.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Systematic review reliability was defined by reporting eligibility criteria, performing a comprehensive literature search, assessing methodologic quality of included studies, using appropriate methods for meta-analysis, and basing conclusions on review findings.

Results

From 99 systematic reviews on management of cataract, 46 (46%) were classified as reliable. No evidence that a comprehensive search had been conducted was the most common reason a review was classified as unreliable. All 46 reliable systematic reviews were cited in the 2016 AAO PPP guidelines, and 8 of 15 available reliable reviews (53%) were cited in the 2011 PPP guidelines.

Conclusions and Relevance

The partnership between Cochrane Eyes and Vision US Satellite and the AAO provides the AAO access to an evidence base of relevant and reliable systematic reviews, thereby supporting robust and efficient clinical practice guidelines development to improve the quality of eye care.

Ciliary sulcus implantation of intraocular lens in manual small incision cataract surgery complicated by large posterior capsule rupture

The present study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficiency of ciliary sulcus implantation of intraocular lens (IOL) in patients that had undergone manual small incision cataract surgery (MSICS) complicated by large posterior capsule rupture (LPCR). A total of 11 eyes taken from 11 patients in Brazzaville, Republic of the Congo, that had experienced LPCR following MSICS were included in the current study. A rigid single-piece IOL (5.5 mm optic, 12.50 mm overall length) was implanted into the ciliary sulcus. Postoperative follow-up assessments evaluated visual acuity, anterior segment biomicroscopy, IOL centration and position, and fundus biomicroscopy. The median follow-up time was 3.7 months (range, 2-6 months). All patients experienced vision improvement: Uncorrected visual acuity 2 months following surgery was 0.3-0.5 in 9 patients and >0.5 in 2 patients. Postoperative complications included pronounced anterior segment inflammation (1 patient), mild corneal endothelium edema (3 patients), residual cortex (1 patient) and intraocular pressure elevation (1 patient). Significant IOL decentration and tilt were not observed in any patients. The results of the present study indicate that ciliary sulcus implantation of a rigid single-piece IOL may be a feasible and effective method of treating patients that have experienced LPCR complications following cataract surgery, as it provides satisfactory visual acuity outcomes. Appropriate intraoperative management may reduce the incidence of postoperative complications.

Outcomes of cataract surgery performed by non-physician cataract surgeons in remote North Cameroon

OBJECTIVE

To report the outcomes of cataract surgery performed by non-physician cataract surgeons due to lack of ophthalmologists in remote areas of North Cameroon.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

The main centre of the non-governmental organisation Ophtalmo Sans Frontières in Lagdo.

PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS

Age-related cataract surgery performed between 28 November 2016 and 17 May 2017.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES

The main outcome measure was presenting visual acuity (PVA) 1-4 weeks after surgery, classified according to the WHO as good (PVA ≥6/18), borderline (PVA 6/60-6/18) and poor (PVA <6/60). The WHO definition of blindness (visual acuity <3/60) and severe visual acuity (visual acuity 3/60-6/60) was used to assess the proportion of patients with a change in WHO category.

RESULTS

We included 474 eyes of 474 patients; the mean (SD) age was 63.9 (15) years (42.2% female). At 1-4 weeks after surgery, the surgical outcome was good for 170 patients (41.1%), borderline for 213 (51.5%) and poor for 31 (7.5%). In all, 224 patients (47.2%) had blindness or severe visual impairment before cataract surgery and 22 (5.3%) at 1-4 weeks after surgery. Poor visual outcome was associated with older age (p=0.018), preoperative blindness or severe impairment (p=0.012) and surgical complications (p=0.019).

CONCLUSION

Blindness and severe visual impairment were significantly decreased in the early postoperative period. Poor outcomes were associated with older age, low preoperative binocular visual acuity and intraoperative complications. Non-physician cataract surgeons may compensate for the lack of ophthalmologists in remote areas of low-income and middle-income countries.

Different-sized incisions for phacoemulsification in age-related cataract

BACKGROUND

Age-related cataract is the principal cause of blindness and visual impairment in the world. Phacoemulsification is the main surgical procedure used to treat cataract. The comparative effectiveness and safety of different-sized incisions for phacoemulsification has not been determined.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness and safety of smaller versus larger incisions for phacoemulsification in age-related cataract. The primary outcome of this review was surgically induced astigmatism at three months after surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2016, Issue 10), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 28 October 2016), Embase Ovid (1947 to 28 October 2016), PubMed (1948 to 28 October 2016), LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database) (1982 to 28 October 2016), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com; last searched 13 May 2013), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov; searched 28 October 2016), and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp; searched 28 October 2016). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different-sized incisions in people with age-related cataract undergoing phacoemulsification.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 26 RCTs with a total of 2737 participants (3120 eyes). These trials were conducted in Bosnia and Herzegovina, China, France, India, Italy, Korea, Spain, Switzerland, and Turkey. Half of the 26 trials were conducted in China. We judged all trials as mostly at unclear to low risk of bias. The included RCTs compared four different-sized incisions:<= 1.5 mm, 1.8 mm, 2.2 mm, and approximately 3.0 mm. These incisions were performed using three different techniques: coaxial and biaxial microincision phacoemulsification (C-MICS and B-MICS) and standard phacoemulsification. Not all studies provided data in a form that could be included in this review. Five studies had three arms.Fifteen trials compared C-MICS (2.2 mm) with standard phacoemulsification (about 3.0 mm). Very low-certainty evidence suggested less surgically induced astigmatism in the C-MICS group at three months compared with standard phacoemulsification (mean difference (MD) -0.19 diopters (D), 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.30 to -0.09; 996 eyes; 8 RCTs). There was low-certainty evidence that both groups achieved similar best-corrected visual acuity (MD 0.00 logMAR, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.02; 242 eyes; 3 RCTs). There was low-certainty evidence of little or no difference in endothelial cell loss and central corneal thickness comparing C-MICS with standard phacoemulsification (MD -7.23 cells/mm², 95% CI -78.66 to 64.20; 596 eyes; 4 RCTs) and (MD -0.68 μm, 95% CI -3.26 to 1.90; 487 eyes; 5 RCTs).Nine trials compared C-MICS (1.8 mm) with standard phacoemulsification (about 3.0 mm). Very low-certainty evidence suggested less astigmatism at three months in the C-MICS group compared with standard phacoemulsification group (MD -0.23 D, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.13; 561 eyes; 5 RCTs). Low-certainty evidence suggested little or no difference in best-corrected visual acuity, endothelial cell loss, and central corneal thickness in the two groups at three months (MD -0.02 logMAR, 95% CI -0.03 to -0.00; 192 eyes; 3 RCTs), (MD 7.56 cells/mm², 95% CI -67.65 to 82.77; 380 eyes; 5 RCTs), and (MD -1.52 μm, 95% CI -6.29 to 3.25; 245 eyes; 3 RCTs).Six studies compared C-MICS (1.8 mm) with C-MICS (2.2 mm). There was low-certainty evidence that astigmatism, visual acuity, and central corneal thickness were similar in the two groups at three months (MD 0.04 D, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.16; 259 eyes; 3 RCTs), (MD 0.01 logMAR, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.04; 200 eyes; 3 RCTs), and (MD 0.45 μm, 95% CI -2.70 to 3.60; 100 eyes; 1 RCT). Very low-certainty evidence suggested higher endothelial cell loss in the 1.8 mm group (MD 213.00 cells/mm², 95% CI 11.15 to 414.85; 70 eyes; 1 RCT).Four studies compared B-MICS (<= 1.5 mm) with standard phacoemulsification (about 3.0 mm). Astigmatism was similar in the two groups at three months (MD -0.01 D, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.01; 368 eyes; 2 RCTs; moderate-certainty evidence). There was low-certainty evidence on visual acuity, suggesting little or no difference between the two groups (MD -0.02 logMAR, 95% CI -0.04 to -0.00; 464 eyes; 3 RCTs). Low-certainty evidence on endothelial cell loss and central corneal thickness also suggested little or no difference between the two groups (MD 55.83 cells/mm², 95% CI -34.93 to 146.59; 280 eyes; 1 RCT) and (MD 0.10 μm, 95% CI -14.04 to 14.24; 90 eyes; 1 RCT).None of the trials reported on quality of life. One trial reported that no participants experienced endophthalmitis or posterior capsule rupture; they also reported little or no difference between incision groups regarding corneal edema (risk ratio 1.02, 95% CI 0.40 to 2.63; 362 eyes).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Phacoemulsification with smaller incisions was not consistently associated with less surgically induced astigmatism compared with phacoemulsification with larger incisions. Coaxial microincision phacoemulsification may be associated with less astigmatism than standard phacoemulsification, but the difference was small, in the order of 0.2 D, and the evidence was uncertain. Safety outcomes and quality of life were not adequately reported; these should be addressed in future studies.

Cataracts

An estimated 95 million people worldwide are affected by cataract. Cataract still remains the leading cause of blindness in middle-income and low-income countries. With the advancement of surgical technology and techniques, cataract surgery has evolved to small-incisional surgery with rapid visual recovery, good visual outcomes, and minimal complications in most patients. With the development of advanced technology in intraocular lenses, the combined treatment of cataract and astigmatism or presbyopia, or both, is possible. Paediatric cataracts have a different pathogenesis, surgical concerns, and postoperative clinical course from those of age-related cataracts, and the visual outcome is multifactorial and dependent on postoperative visual rehabilitation. New developments in cataract surgery will continue to improve the visual, anatomical, and patient-reported outcomes. Future work should focus on promoting the accessibility and quality of cataract surgery in developing countries.

Manual small incision cataract surgery (MSICS) with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age-related cataract

BACKGROUND

Age-related cataract is the opacification of the lens, which occurs as a result of denaturation of lens proteins. Age-related cataract remains the leading cause of blindness globally, except in the most developed countries. A key question is what is the best way of removing the lens, especially in lower income settings.

OBJECTIVES

To compare two different techniques of lens removal in cataract surgery: manual small incision surgery (MSICS) and extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (2014, Issue 8), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to September 2014), EMBASE (January 1980 to September 2014), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS) (January 1982 to September 2014), Web of Science Conference Proceedings Citation Index- Science (CPCI-S), (January 1990 to September 2014), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 23 September 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) only. Participants in the trials were people with age-related cataract. We included trials where MSICS with a posterior chamber intraocular lens (IOL) implant was compared to ECCE with a posterior chamber IOL implant.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were collected independently by two authors. We aimed to collect data on presenting visual acuity 6/12 or better and best-corrected visual acuity of less than 6/60 at three months and one year after surgery. Other outcomes included intraoperative complications, long-term complications (one year or more after surgery), quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. There were not enough data available from the included trials to perform a meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

Three trials randomly allocating people with age-related cataract to MSICS or ECCE were included in this review (n = 953 participants). Two trials were conducted in India and one in Nepal. Trial methods, such as random allocation and allocation concealment, were not clearly described; in only one trial was an effort made to mask outcome assessors. The three studies reported follow-up six to eight weeks after surgery. In two studies, more participants in the MSICS groups achieved unaided visual acuity of 6/12 or 6/18 or better compared to the ECCE group, but overall not more than 50% of people achieved good functional vision in the two studies. 10/806 (1.2%) of people enrolled in two trials had a poor outcome after surgery (best-corrected vision less than 6/60) with no evidence of difference in risk between the two techniques (risk ratio (RR) 1.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45 to 5.55). Surgically induced astigmatism was more common with the ECCE procedure than MSICS in the two trials that reported this outcome. In one study there were more intra- and postoperative complications in the MSICS group. One study reported that the costs of the two procedures were similar.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are no other studies from other countries other than India and Nepal and there are insufficient data on cost-effectiveness of each procedure. Better evidence is needed before any change may be implemented. Future studies need to have longer-term follow-up and be conducted to minimize biases revealed in this review with a larger sample size to allow examination of adverse events.