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

Trifocal versus extended depth of focus (EDOF) intraocular lenses after cataract extraction

BACKGROUND

Cataract, defined as an opacity of the lens in one or both eyes, is the leading cause of blindness worldwide. Cataract may initially be treated with new spectacles, but often surgery is required, which involves removing the cataract and placing a new artificial lens, usually made from hydrophobic acrylic. Recent advancements in intraocular lens (IOL) technology have led to the emergence of a diverse array of implantable lenses that aim to minimise spectacle dependence at all distances (near, intermediate, and distance). To assess the relative merits of these lenses, measurements of visual acuity are needed. Visual acuity is a measurement of the sharpness of vision at a distance of 6 metres (or 20 feet). Normal vision is 6/6 (or 20/20). The Jaegar eye card is used to measure near visual acuity. J1 is the smallest text and J2 is considered equivalent to 6/6 (or 20/20) for near vision.

OBJECTIVES

To compare visual outcomes after implantation of trifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) to those of extended depth of focus (EDOF) IOLs. To produce a brief economic commentary summarising recent economic evaluations that compare trifocal IOLs with EDOF IOLs.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register), MEDLINE, Embase, and three trial registries on 15 June 2022. For our economic evaluation, we also searched MEDLINE and Embase using economic search filters to 15 June 2022, and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database (EED) from 1968 up to and including 31 December 2014. We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies comparing trifocal and EDOF IOLs in adults undergoing cataract surgery. We did not include studies involving people receiving IOLs for correction of refractive error alone (or refractive lens exchange in the absence of cataract).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Two review authors working independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted data from the reports. We assessed the risk of bias in the studies, and we assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five studies that compared trifocal and EDOF lenses in people undergoing cataract surgery. Three trifocal lenses (AcrySof IQ PanOptix, ATLISA Tri 839MP, FineVision Micro F) and one EDOF lens (TECNIS Symfony ZXR00) were evaluated. The studies took place in Europe and North America. Follow-up ranged from three to six months. Of the 239 enroled participants, 233 (466 eyes) completed follow-up and were included in the analyses. The mean age of participants was 68.2 years, and 64% of participants were female. In general, the risk of bias in the studies was unclear as methods for random sequence generation and allocation concealment were poorly reported, and we judged one study to be at high risk of performance and detection bias. We assessed the certainty of the evidence for all outcomes as low, downgrading for the risk of bias and for imprecision. In two studies involving a total of 254 people, there was little or no difference between trifocal and EDOF lenses for uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity worse than 6/6. Sixty per cent of participants in both groups had uncorrected distance visual acuity worse than 6/6 (risk ratio (RR) 1.06, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.88 to 1.27). Thirty-one per cent of the trifocal group and 38% of the EDOF group had corrected distance visual acuity worse than 6/6 (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.39). In one study of 60 people, there were fewer cases of uncorrected near visual acuity worse than J2 in the trifocal group (3%) compared with the EDOF group (30%) (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.65). In two studies, participants were asked about spectacle independence using subjective questionnaires. There was no evidence of either lens type being superior. One further study of 60 participants reported, "overall, 90% of patients achieved spectacle independence", but did not categorise this by lens type. All studies included postoperative patient-reported visual function, which was measured using different questionnaires. Irrespective of the questionnaire used, both types of lenses scored well, and there was little evidence of any important differences between them. Two studies included patient-reported ocular aberrations (glare and halos). The outcomes were reported in different ways and could not be pooled; individually, these studies were too small to detect meaningful differences in glare and halos between groups. One study reported no surgical complications. Three studies did not mention surgical complications. One study reported YAG capsulotomy for posterior capsular opacification (PCO) in one participant (one eye) in each group. One study reported no PCO. Two studies did not report PCO. One study reported that three participants (one trifocal and two EDOF) underwent laser-assisted subepithelial keratectomy (LASEK) to correct residual myopic refractive error or astigmatism. One study reported a subset of participants who were considering laser enhancement at the end of the study period (nine trifocal and two EDOF). Two studies did not report laser enhancement rates. No economic evaluation studies were identified for inclusion in this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Distance visual acuity after cataract surgery may be similar whether the lenses implanted are trifocal IOLs or EDOF (TECNIS Symfony) IOLs. People receiving trifocal IOLs may achieve better near vision and may be less dependent on spectacles for near vision. Both lenses were reported to have adverse subjective visual phenomena, such as glare and halos, with no meaningful difference detected between lenses.

A Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Cataract: Evidence to Support the Development of the WHO Package of Eye Care Interventions

The World Health Organization (WHO) is developing a Package of Eye Care Interventions (PECI) to facilitate the integration of eye care into Universal Health Coverage. This paper presents the results of a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines for cataract in adults, to help inform PECI development. We searched academic and guideline databases, and websites of professional associations, for guidelines published between January 2010 and April 2020. Guidelines were excluded if there was commercial funding or unmanaged conflicts of interest. Quality appraisal was conducted using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II tool. We identified 3778 reports, 35 related to cataract guidelines, four of which met the inclusion criteria (United Kingdom: 2, United States: 1, Iran: 1). The recommendations across the four guidelines covered pre-operative (43%), intra-operative (37%), and post-operative interventions (20%). Most ‘strong’ recommendations were supported by good quality evidence. Differences in recommendations across guidelines may be attributable to time of publication or regional differences in surgical practice. Few guidelines met the quality criteria, and only three countries were represented. The results of this step of the PECI development process will inform subsequent phases for development of the WHO’s package of evidence-based eye care interventions for cataract.

Outcomes of Cataract Surgeries Performed in Makeshift Operating Rooms in Rural Camps, Compared to Hospital-based Surgeries in Nepal

PURPOSE

This study was undertaken to evaluate the complication rates and visual outcomes of outreach cataract surgeries done in makeshift operating rooms.

METHOD

In this retrospective study, surgical outcomes of consecutive Manual Small Incision Cataract Surgeries (MSICS) done in 11 rural camps in Nepal were compared with the results of consecutive hospital surgeries (MSICS and phacoemulsification) done by the same surgeon. Surgeries were done from September 2018 to March 2020.

RESULTS

Out of 1034 study population in each group, a significantly higher number (p < .001) of camp patients (27%, n = 279) were either blind or had severe visual impairment when compared to hospital patients (18.6%, n = 192). Around 88.9% (n = 919) of cases operated in camps and 85.7% (n = 886) in the hospital achieved uncorrected visual acuity (VA) of 6/18 or better on the first postoperative day. Poor outcome (VA<6/60) was seen in 3.7% (n = 38) of cases in camps and 3.9% (n = 40) in the hospital. The difference in visual outcomes was not significant (p = .162) when the results were controlled for other associated variables. There was no significant difference (p = .126) between complication rates in camps (1.9%, n = 20) and hospital surgeries (3.5%, n = 36) when preoperative conditions were statistically controlled. No cases of endophthalmitis were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Makeshift operating rooms can be used for cataract surgeries in rural areas where no standard operating rooms are available. If appropriate patient selection criteria and standard surgical protocols are followed, good surgical outcomes can be achieved in camps by an experienced surgical team.

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.

The Appointment System Influences Uptake of Cataract Surgical Services in Rwanda

The aim of this study was to investigate barriers and enablers associated with the uptake of cataract surgery in Rwanda, where financial protection is almost universally available. This was a hospital-based cross-sectional study where potential participants were adults aged >18 years who accepted an appointment for cataract surgery during the study period (May–July 2019). Information was collected from hospital records and a semi-structured questionnaire was used for data collection. Of the 297 people with surgery appointments, 221 (74.4%) were recruited into the study, 126 (57.0%) of whom had attended their appointment. People more likely to attend their surgical appointment were literate, had fewer than 8 children, had poorer visual acuity, had access to a telephone in the family, received a specific date to attend their appointment, received a reminder, and reported no difficulties walking (95% significance level, p < 0.05). The most commonly reported barriers were insufficient information about the appointment (n = 40/68, 58.8%) and prohibitive indirect costs (n = 29/68, 42.6%). This study suggests that clear communication of appointment information and a subsequent reminder, together with additional support for people with limited mobility, are strategies that could improve uptake of cataract surgery in Rwanda.

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).

Ophthalmic Simulated Surgical Competency Assessment Rubric for manual small-incision cataract surgery

Purpose

To develop and test the validity of a surgical competency assessment tool for simulated small-incision cataract surgery (SICS).

Setting

Participating ophthalmologists contributed from 8 countries.

Design

Qualitative and quantitative development and evaluation of face and content validity of an assessment rubric, and evaluation of construct validity and reliability.

Methods

The SICS Ophthalmic Simulated Surgical Competency Assessment Rubric (Sim-OSSCAR) was developed and assessed for face and content validity by an international group of experienced ophthalmologists. Groups of novice and competent surgeons from 4 countries were recorded performing surgery, and masked assessments were performed by 4 expert surgeons, to determine construct validity and reliability.

Results

The Sim-OSSCAR for SICS was assessed by a panel of 12 international experts from 8 countries. In response to the question, “Do you think the OSSCAR represents the surgical techniques and skills upon which trainees should be assessed?,” all respondents either agreed or strongly agreed. Face validity was rated as 4.60 (out of 5.0). The content was iteratively agreed to by the panel of experts; final content validity was rated as 4.5. Interobserver reliability was assessed, and 17 of 20 items in the assessment matrix had a Krippendorff α correlation of more than 0.6. A Wilcoxon rank-sum test showed that competent surgeons perform better than novices (P = .02).

Conclusions

This newly developed and validated assessment tool for simulation SICS, based on the International Council of Ophthalmology's Ophthalmology Surgical Competency Assessment Rubric, has good face and content validity. It can play a role in ophthalmic surgical education.

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.

Outcomes of resident-performed small incision cataract surgery in a university-based practice in the USA

Purpose

To assess outcomes of resident-performed small incision cataract surgery (SICS) at a single academic institute and to determine the availability of SICS-oriented educational resources in residency programs across the USA.

Patients and methods

A retrospective chart review was conducted on all patients who underwent SICS performed by postgraduate year 4 residents between January 2014 and January 2018 at the Wilmer Eye Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA. Postoperative visual acuity, intraoperative complications, and postoperative complications were the main outcomes measured. In addition, a survey was administered to all ophthalmology residency program directors in the USA to assess the presence of SICS-related content in their surgical training curriculum.

Results

Twenty-two eyes of 17 patients underwent planned resident-performed SICS, mainly for white cataracts. Intraoperative complications occurred in two (9.1%) eyes. The most common postoperative complication was transient increased intraocular pressure (two eyes, 9.1%). Mean preoperative best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was approximately 20/4,000. The large majority (95.2%) of eyes experienced improved BCVA following SICS, with a mean postoperative BCVA of 20/138 over an average follow-up of 4.2 months. Forty-seven programs responded to the survey (40.1% response rate). Residents were trained in SICS in 66.7% of these programs. However, more than half of all the programs did not have SICS-oriented educational resources available for residents.

Conclusion

Resident-performed SICS was found to be a safe and effective technique for cataract management. Considering the limited surgical volume for SICS in the USA, training programs might instead consider implementing SICS-oriented content in their surgical curriculum, including wet labs.

Cyclodextrin-containing hydrogels as an intraocular lens for sustained drug release

To improve the efficacy of anti-inflammatory factors in patients who undergo cataract surgery, poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate-co-methyl methacrylate) (p(HEMA-co-MMA)) hydrogels containing β-cyclodextrin (β-CD) (pHEMA/MMA/β-CD) were designed and prepared as intraocular lens (IOLs) biomaterials that could be loaded with and achieve the sustained release of dexamethasone. A series of pHEMA/MMA/β-CD copolymers containing different ratios of β-CD (range, 2.77 to 10.24 wt.%) were obtained using thermal polymerization. The polymers had high transmittance at visible wavelengths and good biocompatibility with mouse connective tissue fibroblasts. Drug loading and release studies demonstrated that introducing β-CD into hydrogels increased loading efficiency and achieved the sustained release of the drug. Administering β-CD via hydrogels increased the equilibrium swelling ratio, elastic modulus and tensile strength. In addition, β-CD increased the hydrophilicity of the hydrogels, resulting in a lower water contact angle and higher cellular adhesion to the hydrogels. In summary, pHEMA/MMA/β-CD hydrogels show great potential as IOL biomaterials that are capable of maintaining the sustained release of anti-inflammatory drugs after cataract surgery.

Interventions to improve access to cataract surgical services and their impact on equity in low- and middle-income countries

BACKGROUND

Cataract is the leading cause of blindness in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), and the prevalence is inequitably distributed between and within countries. Interventions have been undertaken to improve cataract surgical services, however, the effectiveness of these interventions on promoting equity is not known.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects on equity of interventions to improve access to cataract services for populations with cataract blindness (and visual impairment) in LMICs.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2017, Issue 3), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 12 April 2017), Embase Ovid (1980 to 12 April 2017), LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database) (1982 to 12 April 2017), the ISRCTN registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch); searched 12 April 2017, ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov); searched 12 April 2017 and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en); searched 12 April 2017. We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that reported on strategies to improve access to cataract services in LMICs using the following study designs: randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled before-and-after studies, and interrupted time series studies. Included studies were conducted in LMICs, and were targeted at disadvantaged populations, or disaggregated outcome data by 'PROGRESS-Plus' factors (Place of residence; Race/ethnicity/ culture/ language; Occupation; Gender/sex; Religion; Education; Socio-economic status; Social capital/networks. The 'Plus' component includes disability, sexual orientation and age).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors (JR and JP) independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed them for risk of bias. Meta-analysis was not possible, so included studies were synthesised in table and text.

MAIN RESULTS

From a total of 2865 studies identified in the search, two met our eligibility criteria, both of which were cluster-RCTs conducted in rural China. The way in which the trials were conducted means that the risk of bias is unclear. In both studies, villages were randomised to be either an intervention or control group. Adults identified with vision-impairing cataract, following village-based vision and eye health assessment, either received an intervention to increase uptake of cataract surgery (if their village was an intervention group), or to receive 'standard care' (if their village was a control group).One study (n = 434), randomly allocated 26 villages or townships to the intervention, which involved watching an informational video and receiving counselling about cataract and cataract surgery, while the control group were advised that they had decreased vision due to cataract and it could be treated, without being shown the video or receiving counselling. There was low-certainty evidence that providing information and counselling had no effect on uptake of referral to the hospital (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.67, 1 RCT, 434 participants) and little or no effect on the uptake of surgery (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.84, 1 RCT, 434 participants). We assessed the level of evidence to be of low-certainty for both outcomes, due to indirectness of evidence and imprecision of results.The other study (n = 355, 24 towns randomised) included three intervention arms: free surgery; free surgery plus reimbursement of transport costs; and free surgery plus free transport to and from the hospital. These were compared to the control group, which was reminded to use the "low-cost" (˜USD 38) surgical service. There was low-certainty evidence that surgical fee waiver with/without transport provision or reimbursement increased uptake of surgery (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.14 to 3.31, 1 RCT, 355 participants). We assessed the level of evidence to be of low-certainty due to indirectness of evidence and imprecision of results.Neither of the studies reported our primary outcome of change in prevalence of cataract blindness, or other outcomes such as cataract surgical coverage, surgical outcome, or adverse effects. Neither study disaggregated outcomes by social subgroups to enable further assessment of equity effects. We sought data from both studies and obtained data from one; the information video and counselling intervention did not have a differential effect across the PROGRESS-Plus categories with available data (place of residence, gender, education level, socioeconomic status and social capital).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence on the effect on equity of interventions to improve access to cataract services in LMICs is limited. We identified only two studies, both conducted in rural China. Assessment of equity effects will be improved if future studies disaggregate outcomes by relevant social subgroups. To assist with assessing generalisability of findings to other settings, robust data on contextual factors are also needed.

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.

The treatment methods for post-stroke visual impairment: A systematic review

AIM

To provide a systematic overview of interventions for stroke related visual impairments.

METHOD

A systematic review of the literature was conducted including randomized controlled trials, controlled trials, cohort studies, observational studies, systematic reviews, and retrospective medical note reviews. All languages were included and translation obtained. This review covers adult participants (aged 18 years or over) diagnosed with a visual impairment as a direct cause of a stroke. Studies which included mixed populations were included if over 50% of the participants had a diagnosis of stroke and were discussed separately. We searched scholarly online resources and hand searched articles and registers of published, unpublished, and ongoing trials. Search terms included a variety of MESH terms and alternatives in relation to stroke and visual conditions. Article selection was performed by two authors independently. Data were extracted by one author and verified by a second. The quality of the evidence and risk of bias was assessed using appropriate tools dependant on the type of article.

RESULTS

Forty-nine articles (4142 subjects) were included in the review, including an overview of four Cochrane systematic reviews. Interventions appraised included those for visual field loss, ocular motility deficits, reduced central vision, and visual perceptual deficits.

CONCLUSION

Further high quality randomized controlled trials are required to determine the effectiveness of interventions for treating post-stroke visual impairments. For interventions which are used in practice but do not yet have an evidence base in the literature, it is imperative that these treatments be addressed and evaluated in future studies.

Stratification of phaco-trabectome surgery results using a glaucoma severity index in a retrospective analysis

Background

To stratify the outcomes of phacoemulsification combined with trabectome surgery using a new glaucoma severity index.

Methods

This is a retrospective, observational cohort study that included open angle glaucoma patients with visually significant cataract that had phacoemulsification combined with trabectome surgery. Exclusion criteria were follow-up less than 12 months, any other surgeries or diagnosis of neovascular or active uveitic glaucoma. Patients were stratified into four groups according to the Glaucoma Index (GI) that incorporated preoperative intraocular pressure (IOP), number of medications and visual field status. The primary outcome measures were IOP reduction and the success rate at 12 months. We examined the relationship between GI group and IOP and medications at one year with a linear regression analysis and survival with log-rank testing.

Results

Of 1374 patients, a total of 498 cases with 12 month follow-up were included in the study after applying the exclusion criteria. At one year, IOP of GI groups 1 through 4 was reduced by 2.9 ± 4.4, 3.6 ± 5.0, 3.9 ± 5.3, and 9.2 ± 7.6 mmHg for. Individuals in the next higher GI group had a 1.69 ± 0.2 mmHg larger IOP decrease. The success rate was 98%, 93%, 96% and 88% at one year for GI groups 1 to 4 (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

A substantial IOP reduction was seen in subjects with more advanced glaucoma suggesting that the trabecular meshwork is the primary impediment to outflow and its ablation benefits those eyes relatively more than in mild glaucoma. A larger IOP reduction can be expected in individuals with a higher GI group that indicates a clinically more challenging glaucoma.

Multifocal versus monofocal intraocular lenses after cataract extraction

BACKGROUND

Good unaided distance visual acuity (VA) is now a realistic expectation following cataract surgery and intraocular lens (IOL) implantation. Near vision, however, still requires additional refractive power, usually in the form of reading glasses. Multiple optic (multifocal) IOLs are available which claim to allow good vision at a range of distances. It is unclear whether this benefit outweighs the optical compromises inherent in multifocal IOLs.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the visual effects of multifocal IOLs in comparison with the current standard treatment of monofocal lens implantation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2016, Issue 5), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to June 2016), Embase (January 1980 to June 2016), the ISRCTN registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch), 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 13 June 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials comparing a multifocal IOL of any type with a monofocal IOL as control were included. Both unilateral and bilateral implantation trials were included. We also considered trials comparing multifocal IOLs with "monovision" whereby one eye is corrected for distance vision and one eye corrected for near vision.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We assessed the 'certainty' of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 20 eligible trials that enrolled 2230 people with data available on 2061 people (3194 eyes). These trials were conducted in Europe (13), China (three), USA (one), Middle East (one), India (one) and one multicentre study in Europe and the USA. Most of these trials compared multifocal with monofocal lenses; two trials compared multifocal lenses with monovision. There was considerable variety in the make and model of lenses implanted. Overall we considered the trials at risk of performance and detection bias because it was difficult to mask participants and outcome assessors. It was also difficult to assess the role of reporting bias.There was moderate-certainty evidence that the distance acuity achieved with multifocal lenses was not different to that achieved with monofocal lenses (unaided VA worse than 6/6: pooled RR 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 1.03; eyes = 682; studies = 8). People receiving multifocal lenses may achieve better near vision (RR for unaided near VA worse than J3/J4 was 0.20, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.58; eyes = 782; studies = 8). We judged this to be low-certainty evidence because of risk of bias in the included studies and high heterogeneity (I² = 93%) although all included studies favoured multifocal lenses with respect to this outcome.People receiving multifocal lenses may be less spectacle dependent (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.73; eyes = 1000; studies = 10). We judged this to be low-certainty evidence because of risk of bias and evidence of publication bias (skewed funnel plot). There was also high heterogeneity (I² = 67%) but all studies favoured multifocal lenses. We did not additionally downgrade for this.Adverse subjective visual phenomena were more prevalent and more troublesome in participants with a multifocal IOL compared with monofocals (RR for glare 1.41, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.93; eyes = 544; studies = 7, low-certainty evidence and RR for haloes 3.58, 95% CI 1.99 to 6.46; eyes = 662; studies = 7; moderate-certainty evidence).Two studies compared multifocal lenses with monovision. There was no evidence for any important differences in distance VA between the groups (mean difference (MD) 0.02 logMAR, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.06; eyes = 186; studies = 1), unaided intermediate VA (MD 0.07 logMAR, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.10; eyes = 181; studies = 1) and unaided near VA (MD -0.04, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.00; eyes = 186; studies = 1) compared with people receiving monovision. People receiving multifocal lenses were less likely to be spectacle dependent (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.53; eyes = 262; studies = 2) but more likely to report problems with glare (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.73; eyes = 187; studies = 1) compared with people receiving monovision. In one study, the investigators noted that more people in the multifocal group underwent IOL exchange in the first year after surgery (6 participants with multifocal vs 0 participants with monovision).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Multifocal IOLs are effective at improving near vision relative to monofocal IOLs although there is uncertainty as to the size of the effect. Whether that improvement outweighs the adverse effects of multifocal IOLs, such as glare and haloes, will vary between people. Motivation to achieve spectacle independence is likely to be the deciding factor.

Cataract Surgery Audit at a Private Hospital in Saudi Arabia

Background:

To assess the visual outcomes following cataract surgeries at a Private Eye Hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Methods:

This was a cohort study of cataract surgeries performed from January to June 2014. Preoperative data were collected on patient demographics presenting and best corrected distance visual acuity (BCVA) and ocular comorbidity. Data were also collected on the type of surgery, type of intraocular lens (IOLs) implanted, and complications. BCVA and refractive status at 6–8 weeks postoperatively were noted. The predictors of vision ≥6/18 were identified.

Results:

Four hundred eyes of 400 patients underwent cataract surgery. There were 235 (59%) males. Presenting preoperative vision was <6/60 in 52 (13%) eyes. There were 395 (99%) eyes that underwent IOL implantation following phacoemulsification and 4 eyes received a sulcus fixated IOL. A single piece aspheric IOL was implanted in 358 (90%) eyes and a toric IOL was implanted in 31 (8%) eyes. Postoperative BCVA was classified as a “good outcome” (≥6/18) in 320 (80%) and a “poor outcome” (<6/60) in 24 (6%) eyes. Young age (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 0.97, P = 0.01), male (adjusted OR = 2.4, P = 0.002), and ocular co-morbidities (adjusted OR = 0.2, P < 0.001) were predictors of vision ≥6/18. Complications included a dropped nucleus and a posterior capsular tear in 2 eyes each. Two hundred and fifty-two (63%) eyes were emmetropic or intentionally myopic for distance. Astigmatism <2 D was present in 264 (66%) eyes and astigmatism >2 D was present in 33 (8%) eyes.

Conclusion:

The recent trend of intentional overcorrection in one eye following modern cataract surgery in order to provide some functional near vision indicates that benchmark for success in getting “good visual outcomes” postoperatively (vision of ≥6/18) may need to be revised.

Combined surgery versus cataract surgery alone for eyes with cataract and glaucoma

BACKGROUND

Cataract and glaucoma are leading causes of blindness worldwide, and their co-existence is common in elderly people. Glaucoma surgery can accelerate cataract progression, and performing both surgeries may increase the rate of postoperative complications and compromise the success of either surgery. However, cataract surgery may independently lower intraocular pressure (IOP), which may allow for greater IOP control among patients with co-existing cataract and glaucoma. The decision between undergoing combined glaucoma and cataract surgery versus cataract surgery alone is complex. Therefore, it is important to compare the effectiveness of these two interventions to aid clinicians and patients in choosing the better treatment approach.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the relative effectiveness and safety of combined surgery versus cataract surgery (phacoemulsification) alone for co-existing cataract and glaucoma. The secondary objectives include cost analyses for different surgical techniques for co-existing cataract and glaucoma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (2014, Issue 10), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to October 2014), EMBASE (January 1980 to October 2014), PubMed (January 1948 to October 2014), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS) (January 1982 to October 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 3 October 2014.We checked the reference lists of the included trials to identify further relevant trials. We used the Science Citation Index to search for references to publications that cited the studies included in the review. We also contacted investigators and experts in the field to identify additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of participants who had open-angle, pseudoexfoliative, or pigmentary glaucoma and age-related cataract. The comparison of interest was combined cataract surgery (phacoemulsification) and any type of glaucoma surgery versus cataract surgery (phacoemulsification) alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, collected data, and judged risk of bias for included studies. We used standard methodological procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine RCTs, with a total of 655 participants (657 eyes), and follow-up periods ranging from 12 to 30 months. Seven trials were conducted in Europe, one in Canada and South Africa, and one in the United States. We graded the overall quality of the evidence as low due to observed inconsistency in study results, imprecision in effect estimates, and risks of bias in the included studies.Glaucoma surgery type varied among the studies: three studies used trabeculectomy, three studies used iStent® implants, one study used trabeculotomy, and two studies used trabecular aspiration. All of these studies found a statistically significant greater decrease in mean IOP postoperatively in the combined surgery group compared with cataract surgery alone; the mean difference (MD) was -1.62 mmHg (95% confidence interval (CI) -2.61 to -0.64; 489 eyes) among six studies with data at one year follow-up. No study reported the proportion of participants with a reduction in the number of medications used after surgery, but two studies found the mean number of medications used postoperatively at one year was about one less in the combined surgery group than the cataract surgery alone group (MD -0.69, 95% CI -1.28 to -0.10; 301 eyes). Five studies showed that participants in the combined surgery group were about 50% less likely compared with the cataract surgery alone group to use one or more IOP-lowering medications one year postoperatively (risk ratio (RR) 0.47, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.80; 453 eyes). None of the studies reported the mean change in visual acuity or visual fields. However, six studies reported no significant differences in visual acuity and two studies reported no significant differences in visual fields between the two intervention groups postoperatively (data not analyzable). The effect of combined surgery versus cataract surgery alone on the need for reoperation to control IOP at one year was uncertain (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.15 to 8.25; 382 eyes). Also uncertain was whether eyes in the combined surgery group required more interventions for surgical complications than those in the cataract surgery alone group (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.34 to 3.35; 382 eyes). No study reported any vision-related quality of life data or cost outcome. Complications were reported at 12 months (two studies), 12 to 18 months (one study), and two years (four studies) after surgery. Due to the small number of events reported across studies and treatment groups, the difference between groups was uncertain for all reported adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is low quality evidence that combined cataract and glaucoma surgery may result in better IOP control at one year compared with cataract surgery alone. The evidence was uncertain in terms of complications from the surgeries. Furthermore, this Cochrane review has highlighted the lack of data regarding important measures of the patient experience, such as visual field tests, quality of life measurements, and economic outcomes after surgery, and long-term outcomes (five years or more). Additional high-quality RCTs measuring clinically meaningful and patient-important outcomes are required to provide evidence to support treatment recommendations.

Meta-analysis to Compare the Safety and Efficacy of Manual Small Incision Cataract Surgery and Phacoemulsification

PURPOSE

A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the safety, efficacy, and expenses related to phacoemulsification versus manual small incision cataract surgery (SICS).

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus databases were searched with key words manual SICS 6/18 and 6/60; astigmatism and endothelial cell loss postoperatively, intra- and post-operative complications, phacoemulsification, and comparison of SICS and phacoemulsification. Non-English language manuscripts and manuscripts not indexed in the three databases were also search for comparison of SICS with phacoemulsification. Data were compared between techniques for postoperative uncorrected and corrected distance visual acuity (UCVA and best corrected visual acuity [BCVA], respectively) better than 6/9, surgical cost and duration of surgery. The Oxford cataract treatment and evaluation team scores were used for grading intraoperative and postoperative complications, uncorrected near vision.

RESULT

This review analyzed, 11 comparative studies documenting 76,838 eyes that had undergone cataract surgery considered for analysis. UCVA of 6/18 UCVA and 6/18 BCVA were comparable between techniques (P = 0.373 and P = 0.567, respectively). BCVA of 6/9 was comparable between techniques (P = 0.685). UCVA of 6/60 and 6/60 BCVA aided and unaided vision were comparable (P = 0.126 and P = 0.317, respectively). There was no statistical difference in: Endothelial cell loss during surgery (P = 0.298), intraoperative (P = 0.964) complications, and postoperative complications (P = 0.362). The phacoemulsification group had statistically significantly less astigmatism (P = 0.005) and more eyes with UCVA of 6/9 (P = 0.040). UCVA at near was statistically significantly better with SICS due to astigmatism and safer during the learning phase (P = 0.003). The average time for SICS was lower than phacoemulsification and cost <½ of phacoemulsification.

CONCLUSION

The outcome of this meta-analysis indicated there is no difference between phacoemulsification and SICS for BCVA and UCVA of 6/18 and 6/60. Endothelial cell loss and intraoperative and postoperative complications were similar between procedures. SICS resulted in statistically greater astigmatism and UCVA of 6/9 or worse, however, near UCVA was better.

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.

Extra Large Temporal Tunnel Cataract Extraction [ETCE]

PURPOSE

To determine the outcomes of extra large temporal sclero-corneal tunnel incision Cataract Surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This consecutive case series of eyes undergoing temporal tunnel cataract extraction with tunnel length of 8 to 10 mm was identified retrospectively. Surgical procedure details, follow up, complications, visual and astigmatic outcomes at 6wks were recorded and analysed.

RESULTS

Ninety six eyes with extra large tunnel incision were identified for analysis from a dataset of 670 manual small incision cataract surgery cases. 58% eyes had NO5 or denser cataracts. Intraoperative complications included, tunnel related problems (1 eye, 1.04%), bleeding into Anterior Chamber (10 eyes, 10.4%), Posterior Capsular Rent (2 eyes, 2.1%). Early postoperative complications included striate keratopathy (7 eyes, 7.3%). The mean Best Corrected Visual Acuity was 6/7.5 (0.1 logMAR) and 98% cases had Best Corrected Visual Acuity of 6/12 (0.3 logMAR) or better at 6wk. The aggregate Surgically Induced Astigmatism was 0.32D at 85(0).

CONCLUSION

Extra Large Tunnel of length 8 to 10 mm can be self sealing with low SIA. The complication rates and visual outcomes of ETCE are comparable to those of conventional MSICS. This method can be valuable in complicated cases and during learning period.

Foldable vs rigid lenses after phacoemulsification for cataract surgery: a randomised controlled trial

PURPOSE

To compare the outcomes of phacoemulsification with either a 2.5-mm clear corneal incision and a foldable intraocular lens (IOL) or a 5-mm sclerocorneal tunnel incision and a rigid polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) IOL.

METHODS

In a prospective, randomised clinical trial of phacoemulsification cataract surgery, 1200 patients received either a foldable hydrophilic acrylic IOL through a 2.5-mm corneal incision or an inexpensive rigid PMMA IOL via a 5-mm sclerocorneal tunnel. Intra- and post-operative data and visual acuity at discharge, 6 weeks, and 1 year follow-up were analysed.

RESULTS

At 1 year after surgery, 996 (83.0%) patients were followed up with an uncorrected visual acuity of 6/18 or better in 90.3% of the foldable and 94.3% in the rigid IOL group (risk ratio (RR) 0.96, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.92-0.99). Poor outcome (best-corrected acuity 6/60 or worse) occurred in 1.0% and 0.4%, respectively (RR 4.28, 95% CI 0.48-38.18). The surgical cost of consumables and overall surgical time were similar in both groups; however, the cost of the foldable IOL was eight times higher than the PMMA IOL. Posterior capsule opacification was more common in the rigid IOL group at 12 months (36.1% vs 23.3%); however, this did not affect post-operative vision.

CONCLUSION

In the hands of experienced cataract surgeons, phacoemulsification with implantation of a foldable or a rigid IOL gives excellent results. Using an inexpensive rigid PMMA IOL will make phacoemulsification more affordable for poor patients in low- and middle-income countries.

Phacoemulsification with posterior chamber intraocular lens versus extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE) with posterior chamber intraocular lens for age-related cataract

BACKGROUND

Age-related cataract is one of the leading causes of blindness worldwide. Therefore, it is important to establish the most effective surgical technique for cataract surgery.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review is to examine the effects of two types of cataract surgery for age-related cataract: phacoemulsification and extracapsular cataract extraction (ECCE).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 4), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to May 2013), EMBASE (January 1980 to May 2013), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS) (January 1982 to May 2013), Web of Science Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science (CPCI-S) (January 1970 to May 2013), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the 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 13 May 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of phacoemulsification compared to ECCE for age-related cataract.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected and assessed all studies. We defined two primary outcomes: 'good functional vision' (presenting visual acuity of 6/12 or better) and 'poor visual outcome' (best corrected visual acuity of less than 6/60) at three and 12 months after surgery. We also collected data on intra and postoperative complications, and the cost of the procedures.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 trials in this review with a total of 1228 participants, ranging from age 45 to 94. The studies were generally at unclear risk of bias due to poorly reported trial methods. No study reported presenting visual acuity, so we report both uncorrected (UCVA) and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA). Studies varied in visual acuity assessment methods and time frames at which outcomes were reported. Participants in the phacoemulsification group were more likely to achieve UCVA of 6/12 or more at three months (risk ratio (RR) 1.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.36 to 2.41, two studies, 492 participants) and one year (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.45 to 2.73, one study, 439 participants). People in the phacoemulsification group were also more likely to achieve BCVA of 6/12 or more at three months (RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.22, four studies, 645 participants) and one year (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.14, one study, 439 participants), but the difference between the two groups was smaller. No trials reported BCVA less than 6/60 but three trials reported BCVA worse than 6/9 and 6/18: there were fewer events of this outcome in the phacoemulsification group than the ECCE group at both the three-month (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.55, three studies, 604 participants) and 12-month time points (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.05, one study, 439 participants). Three trials reported posterior capsule rupture: this occurred more commonly in the ECCE group than the phacoemulsification group but small numbers of events mean the true effect is uncertain (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.56, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.22, three studies, 688 participants). Iris prolapse, cystoid macular oedema and posterior capsular opacification were also higher in the ECCE group than the phacoemulsification group. Phacoemulsification surgical costs were higher than ECCE in two studies. A third study reported similar costs for phacoemulsification and ECCE up to six weeks postoperatively, but following this time point ECCE incurred additional costs due to additional visits, spectacles and laser treatment to achieve a similar outcome.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Removing cataract by phacoemulsification may result in a better visual acuity compared to ECCE, with a lower complication rate. The review is currently underpowered to detect differences for rarer outcomes, including poor visual outcome. The lower cost of ECCE may justify its use in a patient population where high-volume surgery is a priority, however, there are a lack of data comparing phacoemulsification and ECCE in lower-income settings.